Injunction against unnecessary disturbance causing by neighbour

Our neighbour is harassing us because he is saying that we have built an illegal construction and have blocked his way. Whereas, in reality, he has extended his house wall towards the road thereby blocked the access of the main road. Thereupon my dad filed a complaint in Panchayat. But nothing has happened. Now when we have been building a boundary wall then he is harassing us. Don't understand what to do. Please help me with your suggestion.

Our neighbour is harassing us because he is saying that we have built an illegal construction and have blocked his way. Whereas, in reality, he has extended his house wall towards the road thereby blocked the access of the main road. Thereupon my dad filed a complaint in Panchayat. But nothing has happened. Now when we have been building a boundary wall then he is harassing us. Don't understand what to do. Please help me with your suggestion.

Your neighbour has been causing the breach of peach by blocking the access of the main road and interfering in construction of boundary wall. First of all, you should stop such interference. Therefore, you should report this incident to the officer-in-charge of the nearest police station. That police officer will send a report to the executive magistrate for seeking an order under section 145 of the code of criminal procedure.

Section 145 CrPC is a preventive measure and its primary object is to prevent a breach of peach by issuing temporary order in respect of a dispute regarding the property. So the magistrate may issue a notice to your neighbour and prevent him to interfere in construction of boundary wall. Since order passed under section 145 is temporary because magistrate cannot adjudicate the civil dispute so, you have to file a civil suit.

You should file a civil suit for a mandatory injunction to prevent him finally from interference in enjoyment of the property. Being the owner of the property you have an absolute right to make any lawful construction in the property. The absolute owner possesses the right to construct, destructor transfer the property without permission or interference of any person.

They cannot preclude you from the construction of building on the ground that it is illegal and against the bye-laws of the municipality. In Fatima v. Village Panchayat of Merces, 2000 SCC OnLine Bom 475; it is held by the Bombay High Court that a person has no locus standi (right) to prevent the neighbours to construct any part of their building on the ground that construction is illegal.

If any illegal construction is being done then municipality suo motu initiate legal proceeding against the person. Since you have valid permission to construct a boundary wall so no one has locus to stop the construction either by hook or crook.

Your neighbour has been committing a breach of peace therefore you should move an application to the nearest police officer and file a civil suit for a mandatory injunction for the ultimate settlement of the dispute.

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Advocate

Advocate Shivendra, practicing law since 2005, specializes in criminal and matrimonial cases, extensive litigatin experience before the High Court, Sessions court & Family Court. He established kanoonirai.com in 2014 to provide dependable and pragmatic legal support. Over the years, he has successfully assisted thousands of clients, making the platform a trusted resource for criminal and matrimonial dispute resolution in India.

Related Matters

Bank refused to obey the order of Lok Adalat

This legal guidance explains the remedies available when a bank fails to comply with a compromise order passed by the Lok Adalat despite receiving the settled amount. It discusses enforcement of the award, execution proceedings, contempt-related remedies, and the legal course available against arbitrary action of the bank.

Subsequent proceedings in arbitration matter

This legal guidance explains the legal consequences and subsequent proceedings arising after an arbitration award or order in an arbitration matter. It discusses enforcement of the award, challenge proceedings under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, execution remedies, limitation periods, and the jurisdiction of courts in post-award disputes.

Civil court dismissed suit for want of jurisdiction

This legal guidance explains the remedies available when a civil court dismisses a suit on the ground of lack of jurisdiction. It discusses return of plaint under the Civil Procedure Code, refiling before the competent court, limitation protection, and the legal consequences arising from adjudication by a court lacking jurisdiction.

Admission in NRI quota can be changed afterwards

This legal guidance explains whether admission obtained under the NRI quota can subsequently be altered, cancelled, or converted to another category. It discusses eligibility conditions, consequences of misrepresentation, university regulations, refund issues, and the legal remedies available against arbitrary cancellation or change of admission status.

Claim related to motor accident in consumer forum

This article discusses whether a claim arising out of a motor accident can be pursued before a Consumer Forum in addition to or instead of proceedings before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT). It examines the maintainability of such claims under consumer protection law, the liability of insurance companies, and the distinction between deficiency in service and statutory compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act.