In order to prove their respective stands taken, both the parties led their documentary as well as oral evidence. After hearing both the parties and going through the evidence brought on the record, the learned trial court came to the conclusion that plaintiffs had duly proved their case. Accordingly, the suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiffs vide impugned judgment and decree dated 15.05.1984, restraining the defendants from raising any construction in the 9 feet wide street shown as ABCD and the 6 feet wide lane shown as CDEF in the site-plan. They were further restrained from blocking or using the said lane for their exclusive benefits. A decree for mandatory injunction was also issued restraining the defendants from blocking the street by way of erecting a gate therein. Dissatisfied, defendants filed their first appeal, which came to be dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Kapurthala vide impugned judgment and decree dated 22.02.1986. Hence this appeal, at the hands of the defendants.
