1. Heard Shri Vengurlekar, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants and Shri Melo, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents.

2. The above Appeal has been admitted on 13.07.2007, on the following substantial question of law:

(i) Whether it is absolutely necessary to make prayer in the plaint for declaration regarding the existence of right of easement by prescription and if such prayer is not made, whether the suit solely seeking permanent injunction, is bound to fail?

3. During the course of the hearing of the above Appeal, Shri Melo, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents has argued in support of the Cross Objection filed by the respondents. After hearing both the learned Counsel with that regard, the following additional substantial questions of law are framed by consent of the learned Counsel :

(a) Could an easementary right by prescription be declared by the First Appellate Court, when a specific bar is created under section 17(b) of the Indian Easements Act, 1882?

(b) In absence of pleading nuisance and substantial damage caused to the appellants, could the First Appellate Court declare that the appellants have acquired an easementary right by prescr