A. R. SOMNATH IYER, J.

( 1 ) THE source of this second appeal is a suit brought by a certain Subbiah for a declaration that he is the owner of a lane and open space to the west of this house and for an injunction restraining the defendant from disturbing his possession. Subbiah died during the pendency of the appeal in the lower appellate Court and his wife and children were brought on the record as his legal representatives.

( 2 ) THE defendant resisted the suit on the ground that the open space and the lane belonged to him and not to Subbiah. But both the Courts found that the plaintiff's case was true, but that the defendant had a right of way over the lane for the limited purpose of repairing his eastern wall. So they gave the plaintiff the decree which he wanted subject to the declaration as to the defendant's right of way.

( 3 ) SO this appeal by the defendant in which the restricted challenge is to the decrees of the Courts below in so far as they relate to the open space EFGH.

( 4 ) MR. Doreswamy appearing for the defendant maintained with great exercitation that the decrees of the Courts below are vitiated by obvious errors both in the appreciation of evidence and with

Click Here to Read the rest of this document