The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for clear title and acceptable evidence to support claims of possession and easementary rights.

JUDGMENT :

Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., against the judgment and decree in A.S.No.40 of 2006 on the file of the Principal Sub Judge, Krishnagiri, dated 26.09.2007 in confirming the judgment and decree in O.S.No.48 of 2002 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Uthangarai, dated 30.06.2006.

1. Challenge in this second appeal is made to the judgment and decree dated 26.09.2007 passed in A.S.No.40 of 2006 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Court, Krishnagiri, confirming the judgment and decree dated 30.06.2006 passed in O.S.No.48 of 2002 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Uthangarai.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per the rankings in the trial court.

3. The plaintiff in O.S.No.48 of 2002 is the appellant in this second appeal.

4. Suit for permanent injunction.

5. The case of the plaintiff in brief is that the first item of the suit properties was purchased when she was minor, on her behalf, by her father by way of a sale deed dated 23.09.1993 from Manickam and his legal heir and enjoying the same and to gain access to the first item, the second item of the suit properties was also purchased in the name of the plaintiff by her father by way of a sale deed dated 19.11.1993 from Manickam and accordingly, the patta, chitta, adangal etc., in respect of the suit properties stand in the name of the plaintiff and the plaintiff is enjoying the same by paying Kists etc., The plaintiff's father spent a lot for improving the suit properties and also laid a stone on the pathway so as to take tractors, lorries through the second item to the first item of the suit properties and other than the plaintiff, no one is having any title, possession and enjoyment over the suit properties. Since some lands had been acquired/obtained from Raji having land on the eastern side, Raji was permitted to enjoy the second item used as the access to reach the first item and other than the plaintiff and Raji, no one is having right of way through the second item. While so, the defendant without any entitlement, cut the common ridge between the plaintiff and the defendant's lands and attempted to lay a path claiming right over the second item and hence the police complaint has been lodged and as the defendant's action persisted, according to the plaintiff, she has been necessitated to lay the suit against the defendant for appropriate relief.

6. The defendant resisted the plaintiff's suit, contending that the suit property and 30 acres around the same originally belonged to the defendant's father Rama Gounder as his ancestral properties and Rama Gounder had six sons and in the oral partition effected between Rama Gounder and his six sons about 45 years back, every sharer were allotted with the lands and it was agreed to have way to their respective shares through their lands by taking carts and vehicles and that usage should not be obstructed by the other sharers and accordingly putforth the case that the 10ft cartrack had been created to take the carts and vehicles from the main road and through the lands allotted to Raji, Manickam, Lakshmanan and Chinnapaiyan, the brothers of the defendant and one Saroja Ammal purchased the land in S.No.77/3 from Manickam about 35 years ago and subsequently, Saroja Ammal sold the same to one Chellappa Gounder on 24.03.2003 and Chellappa Gounder in turn, sold the same to the plaintiff's vendor Manickam on 04.04.1979 and at that point of time also, the defendant and his brothers were enjoying the carttrack by taking the carts and vehicles over the suit property. Thus, according to the defendant, he has the easement of necessity to pass through suit property particularly, the second item of the suit properties and the easement attached to the land runs with the land and cannot be destroyed or disputed despite the sale transactions of the land form one person to another and the defendant and his brothers were enjoying the suit property as an access to the road thro