LODHA, J.—This is a plaintiffs second appeal arising out of a suit for injunction.

2. The houses of the parties and some other persons are situated in the same compound in the city of Jaipur. In order to understand the nature of the dispute arising between the parties it may be useful to refer to the plan Ex.1 filed by the plaintiff. The plaintiffs house is shown in the plan in yellow colour, and the defendant Harinarains house has been shown in blue colour. It may be stated here that the defendant Harinarain died during the pendency of this litigation and is now represented by his heirs who are respondents Nos. 1 to 7 before me. The plaintiffs case as set out in the plaint is that the Tibara shown with the mark G in the plan is the joint property of the parties, and that the portion marked H contiguous to G towards the west is common to the parties and Bharatmal. It was alleged that on 13.11.1957 the defendant raised a wall between the portions G and H and put shutters in it and after closing the door of the plaintiffs room F opening in the Tibara G at the point E the defendant deprived the plaintiff altogether of the use of the Tibara G as well as H which the plaintiff used as a p

Click Here to Read the rest of this document