JYOTHISHKUMAR Vs. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER (WORK)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner owns an item of property. The case of the petitioner is that the only access available to him for the said property is through the adjoining Railway property. According to the petitioner, the Railway has blocked the access to his property and consequently his property became landlocked. It is contended by the petitioner that he has acquired a right of easement by prescription over the property of the Railway for access to his property. He, therefore, seeks an order directing the Railway to remove the obstruction caused at the entry point of the lane which leads to his property.

(2.) The Railway has refuted the claim of the petitioner in the counter affidavit filed by them in the writ petition.

(3.) As noted above, the petitioner is attempting to enforce a disputed right of easement in this proceedings. I am afraid, this is not the forum for the petitioner to make the said attempt. If at all the petitioner has acquired a right of easement as claimed, he has to approach the civil court for enforcing the same. In the said view the matter, this writ petition is not maintainable and the same is accordingly dismissed.