PARU KARTHIYAYANI Vs. RETNAMMA W/O SREEDHARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants are the plaintiffs, who have been defeated in two courts. They approached the trial court with a suit for prohibitory and mandatory injunction reliefs. Plaint item No.1 is having an extent of 8 ' cents. It was purchased by the first plaintiff and his brother in the year 1975. Thereafter, a partition took place between them in the year 1980 and the property was set apart to the first plaintiff. Item No.2 was obtained by the second plaintiff as ancestral property and he is in possession of the same. First plaintiff is the father of second plaintiff. Item No.2 is situate on the southern side of item No.1 property. On the northern side of the plaint item No.1, the defendants' property is situate and they are residing in a house therein. Further north to the defendants' property, Cavittu - Vellooparambu - road passes through. From the road, a way starts ending up in the plaintiffs' property and it has a width of 7 feet and a length of 100 feet, which is described as plaint item No.3. The plaintiffs claim a right of way through plaint item No.3, which was partially blocked by the defendants. Hence, the suit for prohibitory and mandatory injunction reliefs.

(2.) The substantial questions of law raised in this appeal are as follows :

(3.) The defendants filed a written statement disputing the existence of a way. According to them, the plaintiffs used a part of their property on permission to gain access to their property. There is no way in existence as described as plaint item No. The plaintiffs have no legal right to get any of the reliefs claimed.