Postbox Live: Google news india - PET : Extremist love of animals in society

Google news india - PET : Extremist love of animals in society

 Google news india - PET : Extremist Love of Animals in Society

 

 

PET : Extremist Love of Animals in Society





The Bombay High Court, in a recently published judgement, has put its stamp on the very basic but important doctrine of civics that “one's conduct should not cause trouble to one's neighbours.

The erstwhile Chala-Wada culture has been gone for many years now, and most of the people now live in flats. This result has highlighted that along with the rights obtained, the responsibility to fulfil the duties also comes automatically in the flat culture.

Keeping pets like dogs and cats is nothing new. But our love of animals should not be so troublesome to other people that it causes them to take legal action against us, and that is exactly what we will see in this judgement.

Jignesh Thakor v. Dilip Shah, 2016(6) Maha. Law Journal, page no. 374, Hon. R. M. Savant.

In this case, the question of whether the nuisance caused to others can be stopped due to the habit of feeding pet birds came before the High Court, and of course, we will see why the court gave an affirmative answer to this question.

A 70-year-old couple living in a society in Mumbai filed this claim in 2011. Plaintiff No. 1's father was 96 years old. The brief of the plaintiffs was that the defendants residing above them had erected an illegal iron tray and platform on their balcony for feeding the pet birds.

And their birds love it at 6 a.m. As it starts at 30 o'clock, a huge number of birds, like pigeons, gather there, and alternatively, bird droppings, feathers, food particles, etc. Things fall on the plaintiff's balcony.

Not only the plaintiffs, but still other residents suffer from this, and in this regard, they have written to the defendants several times and requested that they solve the problem through mediation.

Similarly, the society also requested that the respondents stop this practice in a written letter. The plaintiffs also contended that their health was also threatened due to such pollution.

And being tired of this trouble, the plaintiff had to repair the balcony by spending Rs., and so the plaintiff filed a suit in the civil court to order the defendants not to feed and water the birds and not to act in such a way as to cause trouble to the plaintiffs.

The defendants, while presenting their defence, admitted that for the past 10 years they have been feeding the birds and also feeding the crows through the window every day at 9 a.m. and 1 p.m.

But he asserted that no one is suffering due to his act. However, the lower court, while accepting the application of the plaintiffs for a temporary injunction, admitted that the act of the defendants was causing distress to the plaintiffs and prohibited the defendants from feeding the birds, and therefore the defendants filed the said appeal in the High Court against it.

After hearing the arguments of all sides and considering the photographs and written evidence, the High Court accepted the decision of the lower court. But the defendants contended that the "Civil Court" in the lower court has no right to pursue the said claim but only the Co-operative Court.

Such a prima facie case was raised, but the lower court dismissed it, holding that the plaintiff was fighting for his "civil" rights and therefore the civil court had jurisdiction.

However, the defendants have filed a writ application against that too, and the High Court has finally mentioned that if the result of that writ application is in favour of the defendants, then the injunction will automatically be cancelled.

This question is very basic, but the court's decision does not diminish its importance. The High Court further noted that not only the plaintiff but also the society had written to the defendants several times, pointing out that their conduct was wrong.

On the other hand, the defendants sent a letter and replied that they should flee to the neighbouring religion and suffer some hardship without making an issue of this matter. The High Court mentioned that this proves that pet-bird dirt falls on people and causes them trouble. The defendants also stated that the plaintiff's claim is time-barred as they have been feeding the birds for the last 10 years.

 

 

But the court, while rejecting this defence, mentioned that the feeding and drinking of the birds have been going on every day for 10 years because every day there is a reason to file a lawsuit.

The defence that the plaintiffs have filed this false claim is because the plaintiffs have financial business with a pet-friendly NGO and the defendants are obstructing it. This defence was also rejected by the High Court, as there was no evidence.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Punjab High Court's Darshan Ram vs. . Nazar Ram judgement was also relied upon, in which it was held that no one can use his premises in such a way as to cause nuisance to others.

Another point is that many doctors say that pigeon droppings can cause terrible diseases, and the increasing number of pigeons also discourages other birds, so be careful when feeding pigeons.

In short, keeping pets is not prohibited by law, but if your love of animals causes excessive suffering to others, then you are wrong. The essence of this judgement is that animal love has to be kept aside.

Of course, it would be wrong to weigh all people on the same scale. Many people keep pets with all precautions; they take full care so that others do not suffer. They will not be bothered by such a result.

Finally, on this occasion, I remembered that Ramdas Swami, while describing the symptoms of fools, said that the symptoms are 'Maryadevina Pati Sune, he is a fool'.

'Sune' means dog.

Everyone should take the right lesson from this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also visit: https://www.postboxindia.com

Also visit: https://www.postboxlive.com.

Subscribe and be a part of the movement to make wisdom go viral.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCto0...

Subscribe to our YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCto0...

Postbox India, under Rule 18 of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India. Postbox India is a news, advertisement, and content development company. Postbox India's and Postbox Live's web portals are Postbox India's leading online platforms, which are best when it comes to editorials, blogs, advertisements, and news online. We provide the best authentic, most relevant blogs and news for viewers who always want to read news around the world. Postbox India provides services in the media sector, government, financial, investment, business, corporate industry, news, multimedia content, and national-international advertising products.

Website: https://www.postboxindia.com

Website: https://www.postboxlive.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/indiapostbox

Instagram: http://www.Instagram.com/indiapostbox

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/postboxindia

Tumbler: https://postboxindia.tumblr.com/

Twitter: https://twitter.com/IndiaPostbox

Telegram: t.me/postboxindia

Postbox India

Anytime Everything

Post a Comment

0 Comments