INDUMATI PARSHURAM SHIRODKAR Vs. CHAPEL OF HOLY CROSS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri V. Lawande, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants and Shri S. D. Lotlikar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents. The above appeal challenges the judgment passed by the Lower Appellate Court dated 11.03.2002 passed in Regular Civil Appeal No. 52/2000 whereby an appeal preferred by the respondents was allowed and the judgment and decree passed by the learned Trial Judge came to be quashed and set aside. The above appeal came to be admitted by order dated 31.01.2003 on the following substantial question of law :

(2.) AFTER hearing the learned Counsels and at the request of learned Counsel appearing for the appellants, the following additional substantial questions of law are framed.

(3.) SHRI S. D. Lotlikar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents in fact does not dispute the fact that the appellants are always entitled to take alternative plea and claim an alternative relief. The learned Senior Counsel further pointed out that the learned Judge has not rejected the plea of the appellants merely on the ground that they had not opted to the relief which they want to confine in the plaint but on the contrary the Lower Appellate Court considered the evidence on record and found that the appellants are not entitled to claim easementary right under Section of the Easement Act. The learned Senior Counsel as such submits that the first substantial question of law is to be answered in favour of the respondents.