M R CHANDRASEKHARAIAH Vs. SHIVANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second Appeal is preferred by contesting defendants against the conerurrent findings of the Courts below.

(2.) The appellants were defendants 1 and 2 in O. S. No. 269 of 1968 on the file of the Additional Munsiff, Tumkur. The 1st respondent-plaintiff filed the suit pleading that he was the owner of Sy. No. 26/2 in the village Hirethotlukere, Kora hobli, Tumkur District, being a member of the joint family consisting of himself and his father and that his father had bought the suit schedule property under a sale deed dated 25-4-1925 and in terms of the sale deed was entitled to draw 1/6th share of water from the well situated in Sy No. 26; and Sy No. 37 belonging to 4th defendant, Sy. No. 26/1 belonging to defendants 1 and 2 and Sy Nos. 25 and 10 belonging to defendants 3 and 5 respectively had also the right to draw water from the well in equal shares. The plaintiff had prayed for a declaration of his right to take 1/6th share of water from the well situated in Sy. No. 26 and his right to use the pathway situated on the east of Sy No. 26/1 to enter his garden. Respondents 2, 3 and 4 who were defendants 3, 4 and 5 in the Courts below remained exparte and did not contest the suit while the appellants-defendants 1 and 2 contested.

(3.) The contesting defendants in their written statement took the stand that Sy No. 26/1 belonged to them and denied that any pathway existed to the east of their land on which the plaintiff could claim any right and further asserted that they were the absolute owners of the well in Sy No. 26 which was situated in their portion and that nobody else had any right to draw water from the said well. On the above pleadings the following eight issue were framed by the trial Court: