REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

M.KRISHNAN Appellant

V/S

M.NANUKUTTAN Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

MAHOMED ALI V. JOOGUL RAM CHUNDER [REFERRED TO]
MOODY V. STEGGLES [FOLLOWED ON]
KHODA BUKSH V. SHAIK TAJUDDIN [REFERRED TO]
UNION LIGHTERAGE CO. V. LONDON GRAVING DOCK CO. [FOLLOWED ON]
BURROWS V. LANG [REFERRED TO]
DALTON V. ANGUS [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA NARAIN AGARWAL V. CARLTON HOTEL (P) LTD. [REFERRED TO]
K.PULANIAPPA MOOPAN V. ANGAMMAL [REFERRED TO]
RAMACHANDRA V. HARI [REFERRED TO]
ALDRIDGE V. WRIGHT [FOLLOWED ON]
KUNJAMMAL V. RATHNAM PILLAI [REFERRED TO]
A. V. B. [REFERRED TO]
BHOLANATH NUNDY V. MIDNAPORE ZAMINDARI CO. [REFERRED TO]
NARAYANA SHENOI V. KUNJAN [REFERRED TO]
NASIRUDDIN V. DEOKALI [REFERRED TO]
RAU RAMA V. TUKARAM NANA [REFERRED TO]
BALLEY VS. RAMA SHANKER LAL [REFERRED TO]
LAMBODAR PANDA VS. RAMESH CHANDRA PANDA [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH CHANDRA PANDA VS. LAMBODAR PANDA [REFERRED TO]
M RATANCHAND CHORDIA VS. KASIM KHALEELI [REFERRED TO]
TUKARAM RAJARAM SUPLE VS. SONBA CHINDHU MALI DEFENDANT [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the defendants. The first defendant is the father of the 2nd defendant Plaintiff is the brother of the first defendant. The suit was for declaration of an easement of right of way. The trial Court dismissed the suit. The appellate Court reversed the judgment of the trial Court and decreed the suit.

(2.) I shall deal with the facts briefly. Plaint A schedule property belongs to the plaintiff. The property on the western side of plaint A schedule property belongs to the defendants. Plaintiff is claiming an easement of right of way over the property of the defendants. The right of way is claimed by the plaintiff so as to reach the public road, viz. Medical College, Ulloor Road. The pathway claimed is admittedly in the property of the defendant It is a very short pathway insofar as the span of it takes only a very short distance in the defendants' property.

(3.) Plaintiff alleges that to reach the main road, he has no other alternative way. It is also said that this is the only way to reach the family temple from his residence. Plaintiff has put forward his case that he has acquired an easement of right of way by prescription. He also tells the Court that he has a right of way as easement of necessity.

Click here to view full judgment.

M KRISHNAN Vs. M NANUKUTTAN

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address