AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
4 paragraphs · 177 wordsA.A. Desai, C.J. and M.C. Jain, J.—Heard Sri Govind Singh Bist for the appellant/plaintiff and Sri Manoj Tewari, for the respondent/defendant.
The appellant filed a suit for permanent injunction against the defendant restraining him from carrying on construction on the spot adjoining to his own structure. He also prayed for temporary injunction which is rejected. Hence, this appeal.
On behalf of the respondent, it is pointed out that construction is going on according to sanctioned plan. However, this aspect has not been adverted to by the trial court. We, therefore, set aside the Impugned order and direct the trial court to decide the claim of temporary injunction after examining whether the construction proposed to be carried out by the defendant is according to sanctioned plan and whether the sanctioned plan is according to relevant building regulations. The trial court shall decide the matter afresh after granting necessary opportunity to the parties within four weeks. Till the decision, the respondent/defendant shall not carry any construction on the disputed portion.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.