The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the executing court to consider and make findings on objections raised during the execution of a decree, especially when they are crucial to the determination of the case.

B.S. Walia, J.

1. Judgment was passed in File No. 46/Civil Suit on 22.08.2013. Operative part of the same which is relevant for the adjudication of the controversy involved in this petition under Section 104 of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir is reproduced hereunder:-

Therefore while having recourse to Section 28, 33 and 35 of the Easements Act and convenient in the facts of the case, the defendant is permanently restrained from disturbing the right to air and light of the plaintiffs house coming from windows on the first and second floor of the southern side of defendants house and for that purpose he shall keep three feet space between his roof and the house of the plaintiff. The suit is accordingly disposed off. Office to prepare decree sheet.'

The entire controversy revolves around the distance of three feet space between the roof of house of judgment debtor i.e. respondent herein and the house of the plaintiff i.e. petitioner herein for the 1st and 2nd floor. The matter came up before the learned Executing Court by way of an application filed by the judgment debtor as well as the decree holder, both alleging non-compliance by the other side with the judgment and decree of the learned Civil Court dated 22.08.2013. Both applications were disposed of vide order dated 16.12.2014 by holding that the judgment debtor was ready and willing to leave three feet space between the roof of his house and the house of the decree holder and had also undertaken not to close the light and air of the house of decree holder coming through the windows of the first and second floor of his house, rather it was the decree holder who by giving a misinterpretation to the judgment and decree was not allowing the judgment debtor to lay the roof of his house even after leaving three feet space between the roof of his house and the house of the decree holder. Both parties were directed to strictly adhere to the decree as interpreted in the order and in case of any violation or hindrance in the smooth execution of the decree on spot by either parties, the other party was granted liberty to approach the SHO, Police Station, Bhaderwah to ensure compliance of the decree in the manner as described in the order. Relevant extract of the aforementioned observation of the learned Executing Court is reproduced hereunder:-

'In nut shell there is no violation of the decree at the hands of judgment debtor as the judgment debtor is ready to leave three feet space between the roof of his house and the house of decree holder and also undertakes not to close the light and air of the house of decree holder coming through the windows of the first and second floor of his house. Rather it is the decree holder who by giving a misinterpretation to the judgment and decree is not allowing the judgment debtor to lay the roof of his house, even after leaving three feet space by the judgment debtor between his roof and the house of decree holder. Thus, both the execution applications stands disposed of with direction to parties to strictly adhere to the decree as interpreted above and still if any, of the party creates any violation or hindrance in the smooth execution of the decree on spot, the other party may approach SHO Police Station, Bhaderwah with a copy of this order who shall ensure, the compliance of the decree in the manner as described above.'

2. The manner in which the learned Executing Court required the decree to be executed is also reproduced hereunder:-

'A bare perusal of finding returned in the case in the above two paras reveals that the plea of the decree holder to the effect that Judgment debtor has been commanded to leave three feet space between the house of decree holder and his house right from the ground floor of his house and for that he has to dismantle his already raised construction is without any substance. The judgment debtor has simply been commanded not to disturb the right to air and light of the plaintiff's house coming from the wind