SETHULAKSHMY Vs. SAROJINI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question involved in this Regular Second Appeal is whether the Servient owner has right to seek for shifting of easement to another part of the Servient Heritage for the convenient use of the Servient Heritage, in view of Sec. 22 of the Indian Easement Act, 1882.

(2.) The appellant is the 1 st plaintiff in the suit. The second plaintiff is her son. They are the owners of the Servient Heritage. The defendants are the owners of Dominant Heritage, having right of way through Servient Heritage from the main road situated on the eastern boundary of Servient Heritage. The Dominant heritage is having an extent of 10 cents which is situated in the middle of Servient Heritage having an extent of 1.15 acres. Dominant Heritage is surrounded by Servient Heritage on its eastern, western and southern sides. Servient Heritage is assigned to the predecessor of the defendants - Kurumba from the plaintiffs by way of Kudikdappu. Excluding Dominant Heritage, the Servient Heritage has 1.05 acres of land, which is the plaint A schedule property. The way to the Dominant Heritage is through the middle of the eastern part of the Servient Heritage. According to the plaintiffs, the width of the way is three feet, and according to the defendants, it is four feet. The plaintiffs filed the suit to shift the way to the northern extremity of the Servient Heritage. A Way having a width of 3 feet in the northern extremity of the Servient Heritage is included in the Plaint B Schedule.

(3.) The suit was one for declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction and compensation. The prayers are to declare that plaint B schedule property is to be used by the defendants for their ingress and egress into their property, to restrain the defendants from trespassing into plaint A schedule property and committing any act of waste therein and to direct the defendants to pay Rs.500.00 by way of damages.