A right of easement can be acquired by peaceable and open enjoyment for 20 years without interruption, but the right is extinguished if the enjoyment ceases for 20 years.

( 1 ) THE plaintiff is the appellant. He had filed a suit for declaration of his right to irrigate his lands from the spring waters through CCC channel through c1 C1 C1 and C2 C2 C2 channels and for an injunction against the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff s right. The allegations in the plaint are that there are two spring ponds in the village of Bukkapuram. The fields belonging to the ryots of the said village are mostly irrigated from these spring ponds by means of channels. The water from these channels after reaching the land bearing s. No. 169 flows through the defendants land bearing S. No. 137 and reaches the lands of the plaintiff bearing S. No. 138 and S. No. 139. It is the case of the plaintiff that the channel C2 C2 C2 has been irrigating his lands and that the defendants had wrongfully obstructed the flow of this channel at their field bearing s. No. 137 and thereby deprived the plaintiff of his right to irrigate. Defendant no. 1, is the owner of S. No. 136/1, defendant No. 2, is the owner of S. No. 137 and Defendant No. 3, is the owner of s. No. 131. The defendants in their written statement resisted the claim of the plaintiff on the ground that the suit channel C2 C2 C2 was never in existence at any time before the suit, and that the plaintiff had never irrigated any of these lands by the said channel. They also pleaded that the lands of the plaintiff are classified as dry and he had been raising crops with the help of rain water and sometimes with the help of rain water overflowing from the adjoining wet lands. They finally pleaded that the plaintiff had not exercised the right claimed by him at any time within a years prior to the institution of the suit, and as such, he was not entitled to enforce such right even if he had exercised the same sometime before. The trial Court found that the plaintiff had taken water through the suit channel irrigating the lands for a period of 20 years prior to 1955 but disbelieved the plaintiff s assertion that even subsequent to 1955, he had been exercising his right. The trial Court found that for about seven years prior to the suit, the plaintiff had not exercised his right although he had exercised it for a period of 20 years prior to 1955 and, therefore, non-user for more than 2 years before the suit disentitles the plaintiff to claim any right. Consequently the trial Court had dismissed the plaintiff s suit. The appellate Court, however, reversed the finding of the trial court and held that the suit of the plaintiff cannot be dismissed on the ground that the plaintiff had not used the channel during the period of seven years before the suit, as there was no obstruction by the defendants ; nevertheless, it dismissed the suit on the ground that the plaintiff has not established that he has taken the water as of right.

( 2 ) MR. Ayyapu Reddy, the learned advocate for the appellant herein contends that the appellate Court had found that from the entries in the settlement register, it is clear that two of the plaintiff s lands bearing S. Nos. 138 and 139, are included within 34 acres of irrigable dry extent for which source of supply is the same as for the lands registered as wet ; therefore, it ought not to have dismissed the suit. The learned Advocate for the respondent contends that the suit of the plaintiff cannot be decreed as it was found that he was not using the channel for more than five years before the institution of the suit and that he trial Court was correct in holding that the plaintiff had not exercised his right within two years of the filing of the suit, and, therefore, the plaintiff is not entitled to the benefit of section 15 of the Easements act.

( 3 ) I am of the opinion that the contention advanced by the learned Advocate for the respondent is correct. Section 15 of the said Act provides that where a right of way o any other easement has been peaceably and openly enjoyed by any person claiming title thereto, as an easement, and as of rig

Click Here to Read the rest of this document