NIRMAL KUMAR AMBASTHA Vs. SUBODH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner-plaintiff and learned Counsel for the respondents-defendants.

(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the order, dtd. 16/10/2019, passed by the learned Munsif-II, Munger, in Title Suit No. 46 of 2002, by which the amendment of the written statement filed by the respondents has been allowed.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the purchaser of the part of the suit property from the father of respondents, along with the right to use the common passage. Since the respondents were obstructing the use of common passage by the petitioner, he filed the suit for a declaration that the respondents have no right to interfere in the common use and occupation of the suit passage and further sought the relief of permanent injunction restraining the respondents from demolishing and removing the pipes and connections of the latrine of the house of the petitioner from the chamber and septic tank lying beneath the suit passage and also from causing any damage or disturbance to the said connection.