MARGARET AMMAL Vs. SUSAI MARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANT in O.S.No.420 of 1984, on the file of the First Additional District Munsif's Court, Coimbatore, is the appellant herein.

(2.) SUIT filed by the plaintiff was for a mandatory injunction to direct the appellant herein to remove the wooden planks placed on the point MN by granting a mandatory injunction and for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant, her men and agents from in any way interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful enjoyment and user of CDEF drainage and dhoni GH, and also to direct the defendant to remove the structures put up in the passage viz., EFTNM as described in the rough plan and the wall put up at the doorway situated on the eastern side wall of the kitchen room and to remove the blockage in the drainage running north south from the kitchen and the blockage in the "dhoni" by way of mandatory injunction on or before a date fixed by court, and for other consequential reliefs.

(3.) AT the time of argument of the second appeal, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that he is confining his argument only on the easement of necessity, and that he is not claiming any other easement. I asked him whether the said submission can be recorded. He said that I can do so, and that his client needs only an easement of necessity. In paragraph 14 of the plaint also, the case put forward is only on the basis of absolute necessity.