SHISHU Vs. DHARA SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is defendant's revision petition. Facts giving rise to the present revision petition are as under.

(2.) Plaintiff-respondents filed a suit for mandatory injunction to the effect that drain from point A to B as indicated in the plan which was functional for the last 150 years has been closed by the respondents be again made functional. Along with the suit an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) for interim mandatory injunction directing the defendant to make the drain from point A to B functional during the pendency of the suit was also filed. The application of the plaintiff under order 39 rules 1 and 2 of the Code was allowed by the trial Court on 24.2.1987 and the trial Court directed the defendants to restore the drain marked as A to B as per the rough site plan attached with the plaint in order to give way to pass the filthy water coming from the house of the plaintiffs. Defendant being aggrieved carried an appeal to the first appellate Court against the order of the trial Court. In appeal the order of the trial Court was affirmed by the First appellate Court. Defendant has come up in revision to this Court.

(3.) First appellate Court has recorded a finding that the drain in dispute is in running condition and the waste water of the houses of the plaintiffs is passing through the said drain. If the drain from point A to B is ordered to be closed as a result of the acceptance of the revision petition then the same shall result in confusion and cause a lot of inconvenience to all the inhabitants of the area.