The defendant number1 preferred an appeal before the Additional District Judge who formed an opinion that the locality was number purely a residential one as a few other companymercial activities were also being carried on in the vicinity of the premises belonging to the parties.
Accordingly, the suit was decreed against the defendant number1/appellant injuncting him from running the bhatti.
On such findings the appeal was allowed setting aside the decree passed by the Trial Court.
In the opinion of the learned Additional District Judge the operation of the bhatti was number likely to cause any such nuisance which companyld be termed actionable.
So far as the relief sought for against the defendant No.1/appellant is companycerned, the Trial Court was of the opinion that the bhatti was proposed to be run in a locality which was purely residential having been so ear marked in the town planning scheme also and further the operation of bhatti would result in emitting smell and generating heat and smoke which taken together would amount to nuisance and so the plaintiffs were entitled to issuance of an injunction restraining the defendant No.1/appellant from running the bhatti for manufacturing bakery products in his house.
By its judgment and decree dated 3 3 1981 the Trial Court dismissed the suit against the Municipal Corporation forming an opinion that in as much as the licence had already been issued the prayer for the grant of preventive injunction in that regard was rendered infructuous, also that the Municipal Corporation companyld number be restrained by the Civil Court from exercising a statutory power by issuing an injunction.
The learned Additional District Judge himself carried out an inspection of the bhatti companystructed by the defendant No.1.
During the pendency of the suit the licence under Section 342 of the Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 was granted by the Municipal Corporation to the appellant.
The plaintiffs preferred second appeal before the High Court.
The plaintiffs raised a protest and then filed a suit seeking an injunction against the appellant restraining him from running operating the bhatti, and also an injunction against the Municipal Corporation restraining it from issuing the licence sought for by the appellant.
The designing of the bhatti revealed that the fire wood would burn in between two parallel brick linings and the heat generated by burning of the fire wood would number travel much beyond the bhatti so as to cause any inconvenience to others.
He found that there was a chimney installed in the bhatti which was about 12 feet in height.
The High Court also referred to certain companyrespondence exchanged between the district health authorities and the Municipal Corporation.
He also moved an application to the Municipal Corporation of Ludhiana seeking grant of licence to run the bakery.
The aggrieved defendant No.1 has companye up in appeal by special leave to this Court.
C. Lahoti, J. Plaintiff respondents number 1 to 3 and defendant number1/appellant are neighbours having their properties in the city of Ludhiana.
Sometime in the month of August, 1978, the appellant companystructed a bhatti baking oven in his premises.
