The court rejected the lawsuit because he was unable to prove the damage

A Gulf Arab accuses his neighbor of trespassing on Wadi al-Bayh

A civil court obligated the plaintiff to pay the expenses and attorney fees.

Archives

The Wadi al-Bayh stream in Ras al-Khaimah caused a dispute between two (Gulf) neighbors, when a man filed a lawsuit confirming that the defendant had built a wall inside the valley’s course, changing its course from the northern side to the southern side, which would lead to the flow of the valley’s water towards his home in the event of heavy rain. .

A civil court ruled to reject the lawsuit filed by the plaintiff, after he was unable to prove any damage to his home as a result of the defendant’s building work, and ordered the plaintiff to be obligated to pay the fees 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 built in the Wadi al-Bayh stream, and to remove the interlocks and concrete he had established in the valley, to restore the valley to what it was before the change, and to oblige him to pay fees, expenses and attorney fees.

The plaintiff stated that he owns a house located near the course of the valley, and the defendant changed the course of the valley by narrowing its course and causing severe damage to his house, and demanded compensation for the damage caused to him as a result of the expansions he carried out, pointing out that the changes will lead to damage to the wall of his house in case of rain. And his family members, both physically and psychologically.

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 at the police station for assaulting them with insult and slander.

The court confirmed, in the merits of the ruling, that the expert experts ’report concluded that there are no damages at the present time in the plaintiff’s house, and that the photographs that were in his possession during the site's inspection date back to 2016, and the experts cannot ascertain the possibility of damages to his home due to rain or rain. Torrents.

She explained that the report stated that rains could only be predicted when they occurred, and the building of the defendant was executed without a permit, and that the building voucher was not present on the general plan in Ras Al Khaimah Municipality.

The court indicated that it is reassured about the conclusion of the experts' report, pointing out 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 it ruled rejecting The case, and his obligation to pay the expenses and attorneys' fees.

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