1. The defendants are the appellants. Suit was for declaration of right of the quasi easement of the plaintiff over a pathway and for consequential injunction against the defendants. Trial court dismissed the suit. In appeal, the lower appellate court reversing the decree of dismissal granted a decree declaring right of quasi easement of the plaintiff over the pathway and also a prohibitory injunction against defendants from causing obstruction to the use of that pathway.

2. Notice had been issued for hearing on all substantial questions of law I of IX formulated in the memorandum of appeal. However, after hearing the submissions of the counsel on both sides, I have reframed the questions of law as hereunder, and heard further arguments on such questions:

(i) Whether right of way be claimed as a quasi easement, when any enjoyment over a way being always considered as a discontinuous easement ? and more so when one of the essential conditions of quasi easement right of such easement being continuous ?

(ii) Where a right of way along with a share was expressly provided for when that was necessary for the beneficial enjoyment of another sharer in the property partitioned und