Venkatasubba Rao, J.

1. The judgment of the lower appellate Court is in my opinion utterly wrong and cannot be supported. The plaintiff and the defendant own adjacent houses with backyards abutting on each other. A drain has been constructed on the defendants land, through which the sewage is poured through an opening into the plaintiffs backyard. Somewhere near the drain on the defendants property stands a latrine. The plaintiff complains that the defendant has no right to pour the filthy matter on his land and prays for an injunction both to restrain him from doing so and to direct the removal of the drain. The finding of both the Courts is, that the drain on the date of the suit was in existence for about thirteen years, and the simple point that arises for decision is, whether the plaintiff is entitled to the remedy of injunction. The right of throwing filthy water on a neighbours land is an easement which can be acquired either by grant or under Section 15 of the Easements Act by prescription: the words " any other easement " in that section are comprehensive enough to include such a right. Where such a right has not been acquired, the act of polluting amounts to a nuis