Can't restrain neighbour from smoking 'in front of' complainant's house: Chandigarh Court

Ramkrishan Upadhyay

Advertisement

Chandigarh, July 11

While observing that the act of smoking by itself is not a nuisance Chetesh Gupta, Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh, has refused to give relief in a civil suit filed by an UT employee seeking direction to restrain a neighbour from smoking in front of his house.

A UT employee residing on the ground floor of the government house on the ITI campus had sought permanent injunction restraining the defendant (Another employee living on the first floor) from smoking in front of the house and entrance of the plaintiff and from doing any act, which amounts to humiliation and embarrassment of the plaintiff and his family members.

The court in the order says: “In this regard it would be relevant to note that the act of smoking by itself is not a nuisance and in case the injunction sought is granted, it would be unenforceable as the definition of the term “front of the house and entrance of the plaintiff” is undefined and vague.”

The court further stated: “Similarly, there is no straight jacket formula to ascertain the acts, which may amount to violation and embarrassment of the plaintiff and his family members and as such no permanent injunction can be granted keeping in view the fact that the plaintiff and defendant are neighbours and working in the same department.”

“In such a scenario, as per section 41 (f) of Specific Relief Act no injunction can be granted to prevent the act, which is not reasonably clear that it will be a nuisance. Consequently, the defendant cannot be restrained from smoking in front of the house and entrance of the plaintiff and from doing any other act, which amounts to humiliation and embarrassment of the plaintiff and his family,” the court added.

The employee living on the ground floor in the civil suit had sought permanent injunction to refrain defendant from disconnecting his dish wire installed over the roof top and tempering with his water tank also on the roof top and smoking in front of his house and entrance and doing any act, which humiliated and embarrassed the plaintiff and his family members.

The court while refusing to pass any order on the smoking issue has, however, restrained the defendant from disconnecting and tampering dish TV wire connection of the plaintiff installed over the rooftop and from tampering water tank of the plaintiff placed on the rooftop.

The issue reached the court after committee formed by the college also failed to solved disputes between the two neighbours.

Court observes

No injunction can be granted to prevent the act, which is not reasonably clear that it will be a nuisance. It will be unenforceable as the definition of the term ‘front of the house and entrance to the plaintiff’ is undefined and vague. — UT court