S SUNDAR RAJ Vs. VIJAYENDRA KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed challenging the order dated 25-11-2000 passed in I. A. IV in O. S. No. 4736 of 2000 on the following facts.

(2.) THE defendant is the appellant and respondents are the plaintiffs and they would be referred as per their ranking before the Trial Court. The plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration and injunction. According to the plaint averment, the plaintiffs are entitled for free flow of air and light from 'b' schedule property and any attempt on the part of the defendant in putting up the construction required to be injuncted. The Trial Court granted the injunction on the ground that the proposed construction conies in the way of enjoyment of the property belonging to plaintiff. An application was filed seeking to vacate the said order, The Trial Judge heard the matter and after hearing he rejected the I. A. The said order of rejection is challenged before me.

(3.) I have heard Sri G. S. Vishweshwara, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the defendant and sri B. L. Jagadish, learned Counsel appearing for the plaintiff. Sri G. S. Vishweshwara contended that the Trial Court has failed to consider that at the instance of a neighbour no injunction can be granted. It is also contended by him that as a matter of fact even on facts, there exists only a vacant site adjacent to the suit schedule property and therefore the question of obstruction to free flow of air and light to the plaintiff is not made out in the case on hand.