KUBENDRAPPA Vs. K.C. LOKESHWARAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are before this Court assailing the order dated 24.07.2013 passed on IA. No. 2 in O.S. No. 218/2013 and the judgment dated 11.09.2014 passed in M.A. No. 27/2013 which are impugned at Annexures -F and G to the petition.

(2.) THE petitioners herein are the defendants in the said suit. The suit in question is filed by the respondent seeking for the relief of declaration to the effect that there is prescriptive easement in AB cart track in 'B' schedule property. In the said suit, the plaintiff also filed an application under Order 39 R.1 and 2 of CPC seeking grant of temporary injunction against prevention of use of cart track by the plaintiff. The Trial Court after taking note of the rival contentions has allowed the application in IA. No. 2 and granted the order of temporary injunction. The defendants claiming to be aggrieved by the same were before the Lower Appellate Court in M.A. No. 27/2013. The Lower Appellate Court by its judgment has dismissed the appeal, thereby confirming the order passed by the Trial Court. It is against the said order and judgment, the petitioners are before this Court.

(3.) IT is his case that the Courts below have committed an error in relying only on the sketch produced along with the plaint and the photographs produced to indicate the cart track. It is therefore his contention that if at all there is a cart track existing, it is in the adjacent property and not in the property belonging to the defendants.