The main legal point established in the judgment is that a suit for declaration and consequential relief of permanent injunction is maintainable even if the plaintiff does not seek further relief than a mere declaration of title, as long as the consequential relief flows from the facts of the case.

Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.

1. This is defendants appeal against the judgment and decree of First Appellate Court where the suit of the plaintiff for declaration and consequential relief of permanent injunction has been decreed.

2. The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration to the effect that he alongwith defendant No. 3 to 11 are owners in possession of land measuring 31 kanals 6 marlas situated in village Moga Jit Singh, District Moga which included the farm house shown redin the site plan and for mandatory injunction directing defendant Nos. 1 and 2 to close their illegal openings for doors, windows, Ventilators, parnalas, drains. etc. on the southern side of their house towards the suit property opened under the garb of injunction suit filed by them against strangers on 15.2.1999 and for permanent injunction restraining defendant Nos. 1 and 2 from affixing/installing any type of doors, windows, ventilators. Etc. in the openings made by them towards the suit property and further from throwing their waste water and rubbish etc. towards the suit property of the plaintiff and defendant Nos. 3 to 11 permanently.

3. The case set up by the plaintiff is that they along-with defendant Nos. 3 to 11 are owners in possession of the suit property. One Takhat Singh was also co-owner of the suit property who has since expired leaving behind defendant Nos. 3 and 4 as his legal heirs. Defendants Nos. 3 to 11 have been impleaded as performa defendants as no relief has been sought against them. Main thrust of the suit is only against defendant Nos. 1 and 2 who have their residential houses, shown in green colour, in the site plan on northern side of the property of the plaintiff and defendant Nos. 3 to 11. On the western side of the property of defendant Nos. 1 and 2, there is a public road. The property shown red in the site plan is in the ownership of the plaintiff and defendant Nos. 3 to 11 which is out of the total suit property. Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 purchased the property out of khasra No. 114/30 khewat No.607 and out of this land they have already sold about 1 marla to one Amarjit Singh. Khasra No.114/30 abuts Kotkapura road. The private passage has been left out by the plaintiff and defendant Nos. 3 to 11 in their private property for approaching their tubewell. It is further averred that defendant Nos. 1 and 2 had filed a suit for permanent injunction against the strangers and under the garb of decree in that suit, they have forcibly and illegally made openings for doors, windows, ventilators, parnalas, drains etc. towards the property of the plaintiff and defendant Nos. 3 to 11 without any right. It is further averred that defendant Nos. 1 and 2 had agreed before the Collector, Moga to close the said illegal openings and were closed in the presence of revenue authorities, but thereafter, they forcibly and illegally made openings towards the private property of the plaintiff-and defendant Nos. 3 to 11. On the southern side of the house of defendant Nos. 1 and 2, there is a private passage of the plaintiffs which is exclusively owned by them and defendant Nos. 3 to 11. Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 have no right to interfere in the peaceful possession of the plaintiff and defendant Nos. 3 to 11. Hence this suit.

4. In the joint written statement filed by defendent Nos. 1 and 2, it has been alleged that the plaintiffs and defendant Nos. 3 to 11 have no concern with the property in question. They have only concern with the passage running on the southern side of their residential house which is being used by them continuously since 11.4.1991. The doors, windows and ventilators of their houses already exist. They have their residential house and on the southern side of their house, there is running passage from road to government primary school. They have purchased their house out of khasra No. 114/30 and the passage is on the southern side of their house. The Collector Moga had no right to close the doors, etc. on the southern side of the