Akil Kureshi,CJ. - (1.) Petitioner has his residential house situated in the city of Agartala. Land adjutant to his house he has sold to respondents No.4 and 5 where they are in the process of constructing four-storied residential complex. The grievance of the petitioner is that the entire land is on a slope. The respondents No.4 and 5 have removed part of the soil from the newly created boundary between the two plots without providing sufficiently strong retaining wall and on account of which accidents could occur during monsoon season when heavy rain would wash out the soil from the upper portion where the petitioners house is situated.
(2.) Ordinarily, such disputes would lie before a Civil Court which can examine all disputed questions of facts. However, this Court has already taken cognizance of the issues involved. It appears that at one stage due to an unfortunate accident one of the workers working for the respondents No.4 and 5 also died. In that view of the matter, I have taken deeper interest.
(3.) The Court had previously called for reports from the authorities on the claim of the respondents No.4 and 5 that curative measures have been taken and sufficiently strong retention wall has been constructed. The last report of the Agartala Municipal Corporation (AMC) authority, however, is to the contrary. In a report dated 13th November, 2019 following observations have been made after site inspection: '* * * As per undertaking to the Honble High Court by the owner of the building, the height of the boundary wall will be 13ft. at the southern side and 6 ft. to 9 ft. at west side from G.L. On inspection, it is found by the team that the constructed height along south side is about 146' to 14 11' and in West side 123' to 1311' which is more than the height mentioned in the undertaking given by the owner. During inspection it is experienced that the wall has been constructed for a length of 47.6 mtr. without any construction joint with combination of 10'(254 mm) thickness brick wall and 0.25m 0.25m RCC column tied with RCC beam at 1.2 m vertical interval. It is also seen that there is a RCC lining of 0.125m thickness along the entire length of all at inner face. But the owner of the building could not produce any structural design and drawings in support of the constructed wall. The said wall as built up does not appear to be sound enough to withstand the earth pressure to be generated from the other side. It is also seen that there is a considerable difference between the existing ground level of Shri Bishnu Kishore Debbarma and the top level of the constructed wall and there is little chance to increase the height of the constructed wall as per present position. The land of Shri Bishnu Kishore Debbarma has almost a vertical fall of considerable height along the entire length of the constructed wall i.e. along the property line. If the refilling work by earth is not done from the bottom and proper fillings slope is not created towards top the possibility of land sliding in future cannot be ignored. Finally the committee is of the opinion that the stability of land of Shri Bishnu Kishore Debbarma is necessary and the wall constructed for the purpose does not appear to be adequately strong.';