1. This petition has been filed for review of the judgment and order dated 14.5.2004 recorded in Second Appeal No. 76 of 1989 by this Court. Since this petition was filed with delay. I.A. No. 3374 of 2004 was filed for condoning the delay. On notice the opposite Parties have appeared through counsel and both sides have been heard, with consent, both upon the application for condonation of delay as well on the petition for review.

2. First taking up I.A. No. 3374 of 2004, the delay has been sought to be condoned on the ground of illness of the petitioner for which medical papers have also been filed. The delay is condoned. Thereafter, learned counsel for both the parties have been heard on the main application for review, as aforesaid, and this matter is being disposed of with their consent, at this stage itself.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner who was defendant in the original suit submitted that the plaintiff in the original suit had not sought any relief regarding right of easement but that has been granted in the judgment. Second point was that the plaintiff had sought for declaration about title which relief, however, was not given by the Court holding that the la