Prem Chand Pandit, J. - (1.) THIS is a defendants' second appeal against the decision of the learned Senior Subordinate Judge, Patiala, reversing on appeal the order of the trial Court dismissing the suit.
(2.) PARAS Ram brought a suit against the Arya Pratinidhi Sabha Punjab and three others for a mandatory injunction, directing the defendants to close 3 windows and 3 ventilators on the ground floor and 3 joks (also called Pinjras) of bricks on the first floor of the Arya Girls High School, Nabha. In is allegations were that the said apertures in the wall of the school were opening on a vacant plot of land which belonged to him and the same was adjacent to his house. This land, according to the plaintiff, was evacuee property and had been purchased by him in auction and the defendants had no right to open these apertures, even though they existed in their own wall. The suit was contested by the defendants, who denied the allegations made by the plaintiff. According to them the plaintiff was not the owner of the plot in question towards which these apertures opened. It was said that the plaintiff had no locus standi to file the suit and he had no cause of action. It was also pleaded that the defendants were entitled in law to open all these apertures in their own wall.
(3.) THE trial Court came to the conclusion that the plaintiff was the owner of the said plot of land, but the defendants were justified in opening the windows, ventilators and jalis in their own wall. It was also held that the plaintiff had no cause of action and locus standi to file the suit. On these findings, the suit was dismissed.;