The natural right of support for land in its natural condition is a right of property and is inherent in land ownership. It is not an easement and does not require plea and proof of enjoyment.

1. Plaintiff and defendant are owners of adjacent lands on the sea-shore having sandy soil mixed with slight clay. Plaintiff's land is on the east and defendant's on the west. Alleging that defendant dug a chal more than 8 feet deep on the western extremity of his property to a length of 79 feet thereby depriving him of his lateral support, the plaintiff sued for prohibitory and mandatory injunctions. Defendant denied the allegation and said that the diluted chal was a natural tank which was in existence from time immemorial and he only removed the silt to enable flow of water and level the remainder of his property.

2. On evidence both the courts below found that there was an old tank in the defendant's property. While the trial court held that 22 feet out of the 79 feet length of chal is covered by the old tank, the appellate court was of opinion that the entire length of the chal is a new construction. Trial court decreed the suit only to the extent of directing the defendant to put up a retaining wall to the extent of 57 feet. There were two appeals, A.S. No. 5 of 1977 by the defendant and A.S. No. 63 of 1977 by the plaintiff. The first one was dismissed and the second allowed directing the retaining wall to be constructed to the entire length of 79 feet.

3. The decisions of the courts below were by appreciating the oral evidence consisting of two witnesses for the plaintiff and four witnesses for the defendant as well as documentary evidence which include the title deeds and two reports submitted by two Commissioners (PW2 and DW4) after local inspection. It is admitted that plaintiff's land is in its natural condition and not subjected to any artificial pressure by any construction or otherwise. The finding of the appellate court that the support naturally rendered by the subjacent and adjacent soil of the defendant to the land of the plaintiff in its natural condition was removed by the defendant by the digging of a new chal to a length of 79 feet do not require interference by this Court in the two second appeals filed by the defendant against the two decisions in the appeals.

4. The only other contention was that the suit must fail for want of plea and proof regarding enjoyment of the natural right of support from the adjacent and subjacent soil for the statutory period of 20 years within two years of the institution of the suit. That natural right was also contended by the appellant to be an easement which could only be acquired by grant or user. Reliance was placed on S.7,15 and 35 of the Indian Easements Act and the decisions in Bauribandhu Patra and another v. Sagar Malta (A.I.R. 1966 Orissa 86), Rasiklal Manilal Bhatt and others v. Savailal Hargovindas Sur (A.I.R. 1955 Bombay 285), Gopalakrishna Panicker v. Thirunakkara Devaswom (A.I.R. 1959 Kerala 202), Ramgopal v. Gopikrishna (A.I.R. 1957 Madhya Pradesh 227), In re Athi Ayyar (A.I.R. 1921 Madras 322), and Sukumaran Nadar v. Sadasivan (1972 K.L.T.1063), particularly the first decision. The sections or the decisions will not in any way support the position canvassed.

5. S.15 only deals with acquisitions of easements by prescription and S.35 is concerned only with injunctions against disturbance of easement. S.7 only enumerates some of the exclusive natural rights of ownership of land and says that easements are restrictions on such rights. Such easements amounting to restrictions on the rights of the servient owner may be acquired by grant, by prescription or enjoyed as of necessity. We are not concerned with any such easement because none is claimed. S.7 deals broadly with two categories of rights namely the exclusive right of enjoyment of the property and dispose of the same and all products thereof and accession thereto as well as the right to enjoy without disturbance the natural advantages arising from its situation. We are concerned with the second category of natural rights covering Illustration (e) which says that every owner Of land has the right