IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM No. 13056-C of 2011 in/and R.S.A. No. 303 of 2011 Date of decision: November 23, 2011 Bhagwan Singh .. Appellant Vs. Sarwan Singh .. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. N.S. Dadwal, Advocate for the appellant. A.N. Jindal, J CM No. 13056-C of 2011 Heard. For the reasons as mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and the appeal is restored at its original number. R.S.A. No. 303 of 2011 This suit brought by Bhagwan Singh plaintiff-appellant (herein referred as, 'the appellant') was for mandatory injunction directing the defendants to remove the plants sown last year and one mango tree about six months prior to the filing of the suit and he be restrained from causing any type of damage to the wall of his house by watering the plaints. The defendant in his written statement did not dispute about the wall in between his house and the house of the plaintiff. However, he claimed that it was his own wall and he had planted the trees in his courtyard and is not causing any damage to the plaintiff. From the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the trial court. 1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to mandatory injunction as prayed for?OPP 2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to permanent injunction as prayed for?OPP 3. Whether the suit is not maintainable in the present form?OPD R.S.A. No. 303 of 2011 -2- *** 4. Whether the defendant is entitled to special costs under Section 35(a) CPC?OPD 5. Whether the plaintiff has no cause of action to file the present suit?OPD 6. Whether the plaintiff has no locus standi to file the present suit?OPD 7. Relief. Both the parties led evidence. Both the courts below returned the concurrent findings of fact that the plaintiff was at liberty to grow the plants in his own house and the same are at a little distance from the wall. The plaintiff has also failed to prove that any damage is caused to his wall and dismissed the suit. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the plants have been grown by the defendant in his own house at a distance from the wall. No specific damage has been shown to have been caused to the wall by growing of the plants in the courtyard by the plaintiff in his own courtyard. If the defendant apprehends any seepage of water towards his house, then he could make his own arrangements. No substantial question of law arises in this case for determination Dismissed. November 23, 2011 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge