G.M. SRIDHARA Vs. H.M. BASAVE GOWDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

(2.) This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and decree dtd. 10/7/2017 passed in R.A.No.89/2013 on the file of the Principal District Judge at Chikkamagaluru.

(3.) The factual matrix of the case of the plaintiff before the Trial Court is that the properties described in the schedule of the plaint belonged to the plaintiff and he is in possession and enjoyment of the same. Under the unregistered partition list prepared on 1/12/1982 by and between the plaintiff and his brothers M/s.H.M.Somegowda and H.M.Anand, the plaintiff got the schedule properties and the khatha has been changed to the name of plaintiff in pursuance and in furtherance of the unregistered partition list and order to establish the plaintiff's lawful possession and enjoyment of the schedule properties, the plaintiff has produced the revenue records. In item No.2 of plaint schedule, the residential house of plaintiff is situated and he is residing there since more than 30 years and he has got renovated the house during 1993 after obtaining the funds from the Government in the name of his wife under Ashraya Scheme. The defendants are the owners in possession of Sy.No.342 of Anoor Village which is situated on the eastern and northern sides of schedule properties and the residential house of defendants is also situated in this survey number. There is a public panchayath road running west to east on the northern side of schedule properties and on the northern border of Sy.No.342 of Anoor Village. There is a road branching off from the village panchayath public road running north to south in order to reach the residential house of plaintiff situated in item No.2 of the schedule 'A' portion of this road runs in Sy.No.342 of Anoor Village and thereafter passes in the schedule properties. The defendants as well as the plaintiff are making use of this road to reach their respective residential house. The portion of the road running in Sy.No.342 of Anoor Village is in existence for more than 20 years and the plaintiff and his people are making use of this road continuously for more than 20 years openly, uninterruptedly and to the knowledge of the defendants and their mother as of right, thereby the plaintiff acquired a right of easement by way of prescription with respect to the portion of the road running in Sy.No.342 of Anoor Village. There is no other approach road for plaintiff and to his people to reach plaintiff's residential house situated in item No.2 of schedule and also to reach the schedule properties. In this view of the matter the use of road running in a portion of Sy.No.342 of Anoor Village and thereafter running over the schedule properties is an easement of necessity.