LAW FOR ALL

It appears that in the year 1984 all the shop occupiers who are tenants of the plaintiff demolished their earlier shops and constructed permanent structure, but that is with the permission of the plaintiff. That evidence corroborates the case of the defendant to certain extent that he carried out the permanent construction and to give consent, the plaintiff demanded money and as he refused to give money, he filed a suit against him on the ground of encroachment. At the most, it can be said that the defendant was having a small structure of 4 x 5 feet as a shop where he was running his business of tailoring with one machine which was tolerated by the plaintiff, however, the plaintiff did not give consent to the further structure of 11 x 32 feet. In the absence of the consent of the plaintiff, the defendant has constructed permanent structure and thus, his ms.s.k.talekar 13 / 14- 14 - 204.sa.504.1991=sa620.2010.doc encroachment on the land his evident.