ORDER

1. Respondent 1 had filed a suit for permanent injunction for restraining the appellant herein to have ingress and egress from the door in the suit property. The said property was originally owned by two brothers, namely, Prag Dass and Durga Prasad. In 1918 there was a partition of the said property between these two brothers.

2. After the partition, Prag Dass sold his share in the house to Ram Dulari. On the other hand, the share of Durga Prasad was inherited by the appellant herein. It appears that in a court auction the share of Ram Dulari in the house in question was sold and the same was purchased by Respondent 1. In connection with this, a sale deed was also executed in favour of the said respondent.

3. In the suit filed by Respondent 1, it was contended that there was a door which was shown at a point marked as X which opened in the gallery. It was the case of the plaintiffs that as per the sale deed, this gallery belonged to them and, therefore, the defendants should be restrained from using the said door.

4. The defence of the defendants was that this door had been used by them for over 60 years. In particular, it was contended that in the partition deed of 1918 it w