BALWINDER SINGH Vs. BOOTA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CM No. 20122-CII of 2009 Allowed as prayed for. CR No. 4859 of 2007 1. The petitioners by invoking the jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India have challenged the order dated 22.7.2009 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar whereby the application moved by the petitioners under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short the Code) has been ordered to be dismissed.

(2.) THE petitioner/plaintiffs filed a suit on the pleadings that they are permanent residents of Behram Sarishta and owners of residential houses adjoining the disputed property since long which falls in the Lal Lakir of village abadi and is a residential area. The defendant/respondent No. 1 is a strong headed person and has installed a flour mill in the premises shown in red colour in the site plan which is residential in nature and is thickly populated. He started running flour mill temporarily with the help of tractor and that the said flour mill was creating noise and vibrations, as a result of which walls of the residential houses developed cracks. Flour mill was said to be running with the help of tractor causing noise and air pollution and that the pollution was affecting the health of infants and children. It was also pleaded that due to noise the people were not able to converse with each other. It was also alleged that apart from noise, husk and dust of flour mill was injurious to the health of inhabitants. Defendant No. 1 was said to have applied for electric connection to run the flour mill to Punjab State Electricity Board and that the settled guide-lines and norms of the Punjab State Electricity Board bar the Department from giving any such electric connection to any such commercial unit. It was pleaded case that the defendant/respondents in connivance with each other were violating all the norms and guide-lines and wanted to give commercial connection to respondent No. 1. It was further pleaded that the requests of the petitioners in writing as well as oral not to allow commercial connection were ignored.

(3.) THE suit was contested by taking preliminary objections that the house of the plaintiffs does not adjoin the atta chaki of respondent No. 1. It was also pleaded case that respondent No. 1 has installed atta chaki in his premises about a year ago and since then it has been working in the area. Respondent No. 1 applied for electric connection to Punjab State Electricity Board and the Board recommended release of connection for running atta chaki. It was pleaded that the consent has been given by the Gram Panchayat as also other villagers. Respondent No. 2 even obtained report from halqa patwari as also from Kanungo in which it was reported that the running of flour mill did not create any nuisance. It was also pleaded that running of atta chaki neither created any noise or vibration nor was a source of nuisance.