K L NARAYAN MURTHY Vs. RAJINI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the defendants-appellants is filed aggrieved by the order dt. 9-2-2000 passed on I. A. I. in O. S. No. 203/2000 by the Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore.

(2.) PLAINTIFF/respondent filed a suit in O. S. No. 203/2000 seeking for an injunction against the appellant on the ground that the appellants/defendants are putting up construction over the first floor of the building in violation of Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act. Representations have been made by the plaintiff/respondent to the Corporation about the deviation committed by appellant/defendants in putting up construction in the suit schedule property. The defendants/appellants are putting up their construction abutting property of plaintiff/respondents. The deviation in construction would cause obstruction for free passage of air and light to the plaintiffs property. Under these circumstances a suit came to be filed. I. A. No. I was filed under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 by plaintiff/respondent seeking ad interim order directing the appellant to maintain status quo in respect of further construction of the first floor of the suit schedule property in the light of the facts narrated above. Appellant/defendants opposed the application contending that the suit schedule property was allotted by BDA and a residential house was put up long ago. The plaintiff/respondent is in occupation of the first floor of the property on the western side of the property. The ground floor is in occupation and enjoyment of one Sri Vijay Mohan. He has not objected for the construction. Plaintiff/respondent has not stated as to how their rights are affected in the present case. It is further contended that the construction is already in progress and when it is in half way through this IA is filed seeking for an order against the appellant. Matter was contested. Learned Judge heard the matter. After hearing he passed the order allowing IA. The operative portion of the order is as under :

(3.) THIS order is challengd as I mentioned in this appeal.