KAUR SAIN Vs. BIBI BIRINDER KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BIBI Birinder Kaur plaintiff, brought a suit against the appellant-defendant for issuing a mandatory injunction requiring the defendant to close the door, windows and parnalas, which about the land of the plaintiff. The appellant-defendant denied the averments made in the suit after which the issues were framed by the learned trial Court. The learned trial Court, after examining the evidence led by the parties, came to the conclusion that the suit of the plaintiff was well founded and a decree for mandatory injunction was passed in favour of the plaintiff against the appellant-defendant requiring the defendant to close the door, windows, and parnalas which a but the land of the plaintiff as shown in plan Exhibit P. 1. The present appellant-defendant went up in appeal before the Senior Subordinate Judge, Sangrur, (exercising the enhanced appellate powers) who dismissed the same vide his order date the 31st of March, 1965.

(2.) IN preliminary hearing this appeal came up before Gurdev Singh, J. , who while admitting the same, passed the following order:" shri S. C. Goyal, Points out that there is conflict of opinion between AIR 1933 Lah 847 and AIR 1953 Pepsu 150 and there is no reported decision of this Court on the point in issue. Admitted S. B. To be heard during this year. Notice regarding stay. Interim stay to continue for the meanwhile. "

(3.) IT may be stated that in the present case the appellant-defendant has opened one door towards the side of the land of the plaintiff, two windows on the ground-floor, two windows on the 1st floor and four parnalas. This fact has not been disputed before me by the learned counsel for the parties when the case was being argued. The learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. S. C. Goyal, contended that both the Courts below have taken erroneous view of the legal position and have erred in decreeing the suit of the plaintiff-respondent. He has relied on Kashi Nath v. Ram Jiwan, AIR 1933 Lah 847, Ganesh Prasad v. Basdeo. AIR 1941 Oudh 442, Kesho Sahu v. Mt. Muktakiman. AIR 1931 Pat 212, and Tika Ram Joshi v. Ram Lal Sah, AIR 1935 All 754.