Kerala High Court: A.M. Babu, J. dismissed a regular second appeal filed by a lady on the ground that no substantial question of law was involved therein.
The appellant herein and the respondent herein were neighbors. The appellant claimed that the respondent constructed his house between the period 2003-2012 and that the construction was without the permission of the panchayat, and it was also violative of the Kerala Building Rules. Parts of the respondent’s property were extended and constructed close to the appellant’s property. Being aggrieved by the respondent’s actions, the appellant herein filed a suit praying for a perpetual and mandatory injunction against him. In a trial before the Court, the respondent (defendant in the suit) contended that he had completed the construction of his property in 2000, and also the building was in compliance with the Kerala Building Rules and permitted by the panchayat. It was constructed with the consent of the previous owner and the appellant started residing on her property only after 2007. Hearing arguments of both the parties, the trial court dismissed the appellant’s suit. Appeal filed by her against the said order was also dismissed. Aggrieved thereby, she filed the present second appeal before this Court.
The learned judge took account of the facts and evidence presented in trial court such as the report of the local commissioner where it was specified that the defendant had built his portion in the disputed land in 2003, and the plaintiff bought property only in 2005when the building of the defendant was already in existence. She filed the suit only in 2012.
High Court observed that “discretionary reliefs are not meant for those who are on a snail’s pace in approaching a court of law.” Thus, the appeal was dismissed.[T.G. Ramani v. B. Nandagopan, 2019 SCC OnLine Ker 2542, decided on 09-08-2019]
