MARUTI RAMCHANDRA KHARAT Vs. ANILKUMAR RATANCHAND VORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by original defendant-challenges the concurrent judgment and decree passed by the Courts below.

(2.) THE dispute between the parties relates to a bye-lane situated between city survey No.655 and city survey no.654-A. City Survey No.655 is owned by the plaintiff and city survey no.654-A is owned by the defendant. The plaintiff's house has two doors on the eastern side which opens in the disputed bye-lane. The defendant's house has also two doors on the western side. It also opens in the same bye-lane. Previously the entire property was owned by Ramchandra Mane. By registered sale deed dated 7.8.1968, the defendant purchased the suit property bearing city survey No.654-A and by registered sale deed dated 1.1.1969 the plaintiff purchased the property bearing city survey No.655. To the southern end of this bye-lane, there is a door through which a public road on the southern side can be approached. As per the plaintiff, he and defendant used to lock these doors and retain the keys with them. As per the plaintiff for the last 4 to 5 months prior to the suit, defendant locked the door of the bye-lane from the northern side and constructed a bathroom just near the door. Therefore, the plaintiff is unable to pass through the bye-lane. The defendant by his written statement denied the joint ownership of the bye-lane. As per the defendant, by sale deed dated 7th August, 1968 he has purchased property bearing CTS No. 654-A including the site bye-lane. As per the defendant the bye-lane is exclusively owned by him and he has no right.

(3.) THE appeal do not involve any substantial question of law. On appreciation of evidence, the finding of common ownership and user is recorded.