VALIYA VEETTIL YESODA Vs. MAMBARATH JANAKI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff in O.S.No.627 of 1991 of the Munsiff's Court, Kannur is the appellant before me. The trial court decreed the suit in part. Aggrieved, the plaintiff preferred A.S.No.160 of 1993 in the Sub Court, Thalassery. The learned Sub Judge dismissed that appeal. The Cross Objection preferred by the respondents/defendants was also dismissed.

(2.) THE plaint A schedule belonged to the late Nanu Achari, brother of the appellant/plaintiff and on his death, it devolved on the appellant, being his sister. There is a residential building in the plaint A schedule. The plaint B schedule is the pathway leading to the plaint A schedule. Nanu Achari filed O.S.No.451 of 1966 and got a decree declaring his right of easement over the plaint B schedule way and for prohibitory injunction against the respondents trespassing into the said way and causing obstruction to its user. That decree was confirmed in A.S.No.170 of 1969 and S.A.No.366 of 1973. According to the appellant, after the dismissal of the Second Appeal, the respondents created obstructions in the plaint B schedule by erecting electric post and water pipes. Nanu Achari filed O.S.No.129 of 1986 for removal of the same. But that suit was withdrawn with liberty to file fresh suit in the year, 1991.

(3.) THE contesting respondents admitted existence of the plaint B schedule way but denied that they caused obstruction to the same or trespassed into the said way.