IS MULLAPERIAR AGREEMENT A MEANINGLESS ONE?

I wish to ask humbly and earnestly to my fellow beings of the legal profession whether the agreement on Mullaperiyar between Kerala and Tamil Nadu can be a well founded and valid one. If one gives another an elephant with the agreement duly signed by both that the present owner will ensure that the elephant will remain alive for 999 years. Can any court in India can ratify this just because both parties have signed this senseless agreement?

The Mullaperiyar dam which has the approved lifespan of 50 years as per the design and construction engineer of the dam but it has already lived for 129 years (The dam was opened on 10 October 1895) Now if someone says that since agreement stands for 999 years it should function for the set lifespan at the risk of the lives of over sixty lakhs people from six districts of Kerala. Our successive governments are least bothered about this Sword of Damocles. And most unfortunately the people of the state do not realise the fact that they are all risking their lives and the lives of their dear ones and fellow beings too. If this agreement can be considered for legal evaluation for a long period of time, what  would be the fate of the below given example. 'A' makes an agreement with 'B' that 'A' will make 'B' the Prime Minister of India within 12 months from the date of agreement and if failed 'A' will pay a huge amount as compensation. After 12 months '_B' could not become the Prime Minister and therefore 'B' files a petition in the court claiming the stipulated compensation. Will any Indian court admit this petition? If this petition cannot be admitted, the Mullaperiyar agreement too is to be rejected outright. Consequent upon the rejection Tamil Nadu can file a fresh petition seeking water from Mullaperiyar indicating the quantity required annually. On the other hand, the people of Kerala who are likely to be affected by the burst of the dam may file a petition in the respective court seeking for th construction of a new dam in place of the existing Mullaperiyar dam.

Over and above, the following too holds its significance. The dam has a catchment area of 5398 km² and 114 km² down stream from the dam. The entire catchment area of Mullaperiyar dam lies in Kerala and therefore it is not an interstate river. Beyond the water sharing as agreed TN has no claim towards the physical dam and it's catchment area. 

Further to these we may also give due consideration for the water scarcity in Tamil Nadu. Wherever and whenever possible Kerala should provide water from all possible rivers to Tamil Nadu. We must give them this water free and should not raise any bill. However Tamil Nadu should take this water from the concerned spots at their risk and cost. I think this can find a happy ending of the long-standing dispute.

K V George