KUNDAN AND ORS. Vs. PARMA NAND AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The following substantial questions of law arise for consideration in the second appeal:-

(2.) The second appeal is brought against reversing judgment of the plaintiff's claim for injunction restraining the defendants from putting up any construction adjoining his own house at the west on a plea that it would invade his easementary right of light and air. Although in the suit, the plaintiff had also claimed an easement of necessity, the court had observed that during the course of proceedings, the plaintiffs restricted their right only to the easementary right of light and air. It was admitted that the plaintiffs' construction with windows on the west at the first floor existed for more than 50 years and the plaintiffs had obtained an easementary right of light and air.

(3.) The defendants took up a plea that the plaintiffs have adequate light and air through the open spaces running along side the room at the first floor and that further there was an open courtyard that allowed for sufficient ventilation and light so that there was no actionable nuisance or invasion of the plaintiffs to justify a prayer for injunction.