BALENDRA KUMAR Vs. KHEMCHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal has been preferred by and on behalf of appellant-plaintiff feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree dtd. 4/3/1998 passed by Civil Judge (JD) Neem ka Thana in Civil Suit No.215/93 (88/78) whereby and whereunder although the plaintiff's suit for prohibitory injunction has been decreed but the trial court has declined to grant decree for mandatory injunction and further the judgment and decree has been affirmed in first appeal No.18/1998 passed by Additional District Judge, Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar vide judgment dtd. 15/10/2011 filed by the appellant-plaintiff.

(2.) Heard counsel for appellant and peruse the material available on record.

(3.) The dispute between the parties is in relation to a gali having width of 3 ft. situated towards north of plaintiff's haveli. Plaintiff instituted a civil suit on 28/6/1978 alleging inter alia that the gali in question is of ownership and possession of plaintiff on the basis of patta of haveli (Exhibit-1A) and since defendants have opened their windows, ventilators, nala, pernala of their house in first floor, second floor and third floor towards the gali in question which violates the right of privacy of plaintiff, hence, a mandatory injunction be issued against defendants to close their windows, ventilators, nala, pernala. Further the defendants be restrained not to open their windows, ventilators, nala, pernala in the gali and not to disturb the right of privacy of plaintiffs.