HANS RAJ Vs. BIMLA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The parties to the lis belong to the same vicinity and they are engaged in litigation for the last about a quarter centenary and that too, over a small matter. Different plots were purchased by the parties and others in ward No. 8. Gobindgarh and it was agreed that a 12 feet wide land will be left to be used jointly for going to their respective plots. Dharam Pal, one of the plaintiffs constructed his house leaving six feet space for the street towards the house of Hans Raj defendant appellant but the Megh Raj another plaintiff are stated to have entered into a compromise on 31.1.1963 by virtue of which the former had agreed to leave one and a half feet site in addition to the one for the street in itself but despite that he did compromise. Kehar Singh (defendant) left only 3 feet wide strip instead of 6 feet, as agreed. This gave rise to filling of a suit by the plaintiffs seeking a decree against Hans Raj appellant and Kehar singh another defendant, on the ground that they (plaintiffs) have been put to irreparable loss and inconvenience bes des the other plot holders.

(2.) The said suit was contested by the defendants by controverting the allegations contained in the plaint and pleading that they had constructed their house after leaving sufficient sites according to the plans sanctioned by the Municipal Committee, Gobindgarh in the year 1965. Preliminary objections regarding cause of action and maintainability of suit were also taken.

(3.) The trial court did not agree with the allegations of the plaintiffs and ultimately the suit was dismissed. The appeal preferred by the plaintiff met with partial success, inasmuch as the suit for mandatory injunction was decreed against Hansraj defendant appellant alone and that too, to the extent that he shall remove his wall upto a distance of one and a half feet. It is how Hans Raj alone has presented this second appeal against the judgment and decree of the lower appellate Court.