SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(Ker) 1009

P.BHAVADASAN
Kallen Devi – Appellant
Versus
Raghavan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Kamleeswaram Raj, Advocate
For the Respondent:O.V. Maniprasad, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

P. Bhavadasan, J.

The defendants in O.S.No.72 of 1993 who suffered concurrent decrees at the hands of the courts below are the appellants.

2. The parties and facts are hereinafter referred to as they are arrayed before the Trial Court.

3. The plaintiff is the owner and in absolute possession and enjoyment of the plaint A schedule property. The plaint B schedule property which belongs to the defendants is situated on the southern side. The western boundary of the plaint A schedule property is an old road. That road goes towards north from Kurumathoor to Vallikkurumbathottam. It is claimed that the road has a width of 18 feet and used by the public of the locality. The road which is shown as C schedule according to the plaintiff passes through the property owned and possessed by the defendants. It is stated that on 15.02.1993, the defendants interrupted the passage of the plaintiff through the road and threatened that he will not permit the plaintiff to use the road any more. It is stated that the plaint C schedule road is the sole means of access to the property owned and possessed by the plaintiff and he has acquired prescriptive right as well as easement by necessity to use





































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top