A dispute between two gulfs leads them to court over a wall in the Wadi al-Bayh stream

A full civil court in the courts of Ras Al Khaimah rejected a lawsuit filed by a Gulf Arab against his neighbor due to the construction of a wall that he built inside the Wadi al-Bayh stream, turning it into a private street, and changing its course from the northern side to the southern side, after he was unable to prove any damage to his house, as a result of what he had The defendant was involved in construction works, and I ordered the plaintiff to be obligated to pay the expenses and attorney fees.

In detail, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit, in which he demanded to oblige the defendant to remove, at his own expense, the unlicensed buildings that he had built in the Wadi al-Bayh stream in Ras al-Khaimah, and to remove the reinforced concrete he had established in the valley, to restore the valley to what it was before the defendant made the changes And obligating him to remove the harm caused to him, and obligating him to pay fees, expenses and attorneys' fees.

The plaintiff stated that he owns a house located near the stream of Wadi al-Bayah, and that the defendant made changes in the course of the valley by narrowing its course and causing severe damage to his home, and demanded compensation for the damage caused to him as a result of the expansions made by the defendant within the boundaries of his residence, pointing out that The changes will lead to physical and psychological damage to the wall of his house and his family members in the event of heavy rain, if it rains at night.

He indicated that he asked the defendant to stop pouring concrete in the remainder of the valley, but he refused, which led to a dispute between them, and that the defendant and his son submitted a complaint against him to the police station for assaulting them with insults and slander.

The court confirmed, in the merits of its ruling, that the report of the experts specialized in the court concluded that there is no damage at the current time in the plaintiff’s house, and that the photographs that he had during the site inspection date back to 2016, and the experts cannot confirm the possibility of damages to his home due to precipitation. Rain or torrents.

She explained that the report confirmed that rains could only be predicted when they occurred, and it was found that the building of the defendant from a house and a fence had been carried out without a permit, and that the building voucher was not present on the general plan in the municipality of Ras Al Khaimah, and that the municipality confirmed the absence of a building permit in the private sector Defendant.

She added that the existing building for the defendant is irregular, and that the distance between the fence of the defendant’s house and the plaintiff’s house reaches 15 meters, and that a large part of the plaintiff’s house is outside the boundaries of the plot, and that if the plaintiff committed to building within the limits of his plot, the course of the valley could not negatively affect the His home or his fence.

She indicated that the court was satisfied with the conclusion of the experts ’report, and left the plaintiff’s request to delegate another engineering expert to carry out the commission, and concludes from the result contained in the experts’ report that the plaintiff has been unable to prove his eligibility to prosecute him with his requests or damage him as a result of what the defendant did. From building work.

It stated that what is proven in the report is that the plaintiff is not committed to building within the boundaries of his plot, and that these borders are far from the course of the valley, and that the course of the valley or any actions cannot affect his home with damage, and with him the court shall decide to reject the lawsuit filed by the plaintiff, and to oblige him to pay the expenses and attorney fees.

Follow our latest local and sports news, and the latest political and economic developments via Google news