Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 335 (0.62 seconds)

Smt. Manikkam vs Smt. Kamala on 14 February, 1986

declaration that the respondent was not entitled to cut any overhanging branches when the overhanging had continued many years and that he was only entitled ... upon the appellant's land for the purpose of cutting overhanging branches, either absolutely or at all events not until after due notice
Kerala High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Ouseph vs Thomas on 5 August, 1986

appellate Court held that when the trees are grown up, the overhanging branches, and the falling seeds and leaves will render plaintiff's paddy ... accepted by the District Judge is prospective damage by the overhanging branches of the rubber trees, as and when they grow up, making the plaintiff
Kerala High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Gurusami Raja And Ors. vs Perumal Raja on 13 April, 1929

sued for a mandatory injunction ordering the defendants to remove the overhanging branches and penetrating roots and for a permanent injunction preventing the defendants from ... altered the decree formally by ordering the defendants to remove the overhanging branches within throe months and, on their default, allowing the plaintiff himself
Madras High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 4 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next