SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA
Mohinder Singh – Appellant
Versus
Surmukh Singh – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsels for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Mr. Puran Singh Rana, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J.— The defendant-appellant is in second appeal before this Court.

2. Briefly stated, the plaintiff/respondents instituted a suit for mandatory injunction directing the defendant to remove the roof put on street ‘S-S1’ and ‘Y-Y1’ whereby he had connected the first floors of his houses and thereby covered the public street. It was pleased that the defendant had got four houses and these houses were corner houses in the intersection of two streets running from East to West and the other running from North to South. The defendant had covered the street by constructing roof in such a manner that the roof of all his houses was interconnected. As per site plan produced on the file as Exhibit P1, it was shown that the house of plaintiff, Lal Singh, is adjacent to one of the houses of the defendant and the house of plaintiff, Ajaib Singh, adjoins the other house of the defendant. The said roof that had been constructed by the defendant was at a level of 10’ and accordingly, the trucks/trolleys loaded with ‘Toori’ upto the height of 15’, which earlier used to pass through the streets without any obstruction, now faced the apparent obstruction. It was pleased



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top