Vineet Kothari, J. - (1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order dated 12.2.1999 whereby the learned trial court rejected the application of the plaintiff -decree -holder under Order 21 Rule 11 C.P.C. in execution of decree dated 2.3.1996 in Civil Suit No. 160/1995 (34/95) in favour of the plaintiff.
(2.) BY this decree, the learned trial court had directed that the defendants will not open any window or ventilators on the Southern side of his house which opens towards adjacent North side of the plaintiffs' house. In the present application under Order 21 Rule 11 C.P.C, the plaintiffs claimed that the defendant -judgment -debtor have opened such windows and ventilators on the southern side of his wall so as to violate the decree.
(3.) THE learned Counsel for the decree -holder Mr. N.M. Lodha with the help of statement of Mr. Deen Dayal and his son Mr. Suresh and certain photographs produced before the learned trial court tried to submit that the judgment -debtor had violated the decree of the Court and, therefore, the learned court below has erred in rejecting the application under Order 21 Rule 11 C.P.C.;