ASHOKA S/O.NARASIMHA Vs. M.ANANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE 1st defendant in O.S.No.333 of 2007 of the Additional Munsiff's Court, Kasaragod is aggrieved by the decree for prohibitory injunction granted by that court and confirmed by the Sub Court, Kasaragod in A.S.No.55 of 2009.

(2.) THE respondent/plaintiff sued the appellant for a decree for prohibitory injunction. The respondent claimed that a total extent of 22 cents originally belonged to his father as per Ext.A1, purchase certificate dated 29.07.1976 and that of the said 22 cent, the father settled 7 cents (the plaint A schedule) in resurvey No.30/6 to the respondent as per Ext.A8, settlement deed dated 13.01.1987. 1.36 acres in resurvey No.30/7 belonged to the appellant and his predecessor-in-interest. On the north of the said 1.36 acres, there is a Panchayat road running towards west. That Panchayat road starts from the PWD road lying north-south. From the said PWD road there is another road going towards the Village Office. From that Village Office road there is a mud road (shown as R2 in the sketch produced by the respondent along with the plaint) having width of 20 links and passing through the above said 1.36 acres. That road leads to the house of the appellant and the respondent. The respondent claimed that himself and the predecessor-in-interest were using the said road since 29.07.1976 (date of Ext.A1) and thereby acquired a right of easement by prescription. Alleging that the appellant attempted to cause obstruction the respondent laid the suit.

(3.) THE trial court on evidence found in favour of existence of the way, accepted the evidence of the respondent and granted a decree. That was confirmed by the first appellate court. Hence the Second Appeal.