law: Indian Easements Act, 1882
  33. Suit for disturbance of easement
  The owner of any interest in the dominant heritage, or the
  
  occupier of such heritage, may institute a suit for compensation for the
  
  disturbance of the easement or of any right accessory thereto:
  PROVIDED that the disturbance has actually caused
  
  substantial damage to the plaintiff.
  Explanation I: The doing of any act likely to injure
  
  the plaintiff by affecting the evidence of the easement, or by materially
  
  diminishing the value of the dominant heritage, is substantial damage within
  
  the meaning of this section and section 34.
  Explanation II: Where the easement disturbed is a right
  
  to the free passage of light passing to the openings in a house, no damage is
  
  substantial within the meaning of this section unless it falls within the first
  
  Explanation, or interferes materially with the physical comfort of the
  
  plaintiff, or prevents him from carrying on his accustomed business in the
  
  dominant heritage as beneficially as he had done previous to instituting the suit.
  
  
  Explanation III: Where the easement disturbed is a right
  
  to the free passage of air to the opening in a house, damage is substantial
  
  within the meaning of this section, if it interferes materially with the
  
  physical comfort of the plaintiff, though it is not injurious to his health.
  Illustrations
  (a) A places a permanent obstruction in a path over which B, as
  
  tenant of C’s house, has a right of way. This is substantial damage to C, for
  
  it may affect the evidence of his reversionary right to the easement.
  (b) A, as owner of a house, has a right to walk along one side
  
  of B's house. B builds a verandah overhanging the way about ten feet from the
  
  ground, and so as not to occasion any inconvenience to foot passengers using
  
  the way. This is not substantial damage to A.