NILKANTH BHAWE Vs. GOPALDAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises out of a suit for declaration of title and other reliefs in respect of an open space called a lane and the right to discharge water therein as also in respect of certain walls. An injunction was also prayed for. The suit was resisted by the defendant, who denied all the allegations of the plaintiffs.

(2.) THE houses of Gopaldas, plaintiff No. 1 and Champabai plaintiff No. 2 are adjoining each other and they are separated by a narrow lane from the defendant's house. A sketch was filed with the plaint and it is convenient to refer to the letters used in that sketch, The plaintiffs' case is that the walls AE, EF and fd, which are almost in continuation, belong to them that the lane demarcated by the letters EFHG is a joint property of the parties and the plaintiffs have a right to discharge water in that lane through five spouts in their houses and in the alternative, a right of easement is claimed for discharging water in the lane through the (sic)cts. The defendant has constructed a wall in the lane and it is prayed that it be dismantled.

(3.) THE trial Judge dismissed the plaintiffs' suit holding that they could not prove their case. On their appeal, the learned Additional District Judge, Gwalior held that the walls were proved to be of the plaintiffs, and that the lane EFHG was proved to be a joint property of the parties. He, therefore passed a decree in favour of the plaintiffs. The Court did not decide the question of casement as it became unnecessary.