The court affirmed that the plaintiffs possess a right of easement of necessity over a cart track essential for accessing their agricultural lands, with no evidence of alternative routes.

JUDGMENT :

P.DHANABAL, J.

This Second Appeal has been preferred as against the decree and Judgment passed by the Sub Court, Attur in A.S.No.1 of 2012 dated 21.04.2015 wherein the respondents herein have preferred the said Appeal as against the Decree and Judgment passed by the trial court in O.S.No.199 of 1999 dated 29.08.2011 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Attur. The said appeal was dismissed by confirming the decree and Judgment passed by the trial court. Aggrieved by the said decree and judgment, this Second Appeal has been preferred by the appellants / defendants.

2. For the sake of convenience and brevity, the parties in this appeal are referred as plaintiffs and defendants, as ranked in the trial court.

3. The brief averments of the plaint are as follows:-

(I) The suit property is a cart track and it lies in survey numbers 123/2, 123/3, 123/5A, 123/5B and 124/4 at Chockkanathapuram Village, Attur Taluk, Salem District. The said cart track is situated between the lands of the defendants on the north and Kalleri out plow odai on the south with the width of 12 feet. The said cart track is existing in time immemorial. The cart track is running from the Panchayat road leading south to north. The plaintiffs 1 and 2 have purchased the agricultural land in Survey No.123/4 to an extent of 0.12 acres, Survey No.122/3 to an extent of 2.72 acres and Survey No.122/8 to an extent of 0.05 acres through sale deeds dated 19.02.1986 and 20.02.1986 respectively. In the said sale deeds, the suit cart track has been specifically mentioned and the plaintiffs can access to the said lands only through this suit cart track. The said cart track has been used by the plaintiffs for taking cattles and transporting agricultural goods.

(ii) In fact, initially, the property in Survey Nos.122/4, 122/3 and 122/8 totalling an extent of 2.89 acres were purchased by one Vellaiyappa udayar through sale deed 13.08.1946 from Thoppaiya pillai son of Muthu Pillai. After demise of Vellaiyappa udayar, his legal heirs, partitioned the property through the partition deed. The plaintiffs purchased the property from the legal heirs of Vellaiyappa udayar. The defendants are the husband and wife and they have purchased the agricultural property on the western side of the plaintiffs’ land and prior to that, the said properties were purchased by one Kadasamy udayar through sale deed dated 22.01.1937 from one Rama pillai. In the year 1928, the lands of the defendants were enjoyed by one Sengapillai and others, likewise, the lands of the plaintiffs were enjoyed by one Thoppaiyapillai. In the year 1928, there was a dispute between Sengapillai and Thoppaiyapillai in respect of the said cart track thereby a suit in O.S.No.750 of 1928 was filed against Sengapillai and others and the suit was decreed and confirmed the existence of the pathway, thereafter, the said decree and judgment were challenged through the appeal before the Sub Court, Salem in A.S.No.80 of 1931 and the said appeal was allowed, therefore, the suit cart track is existing even before the year 1929 itself for more than 70 years, therefore, the plaintiffs are entitled to the said cart track by way of easement of prescription and easement of necessity. The defendants have no right to restrict the plaintiffs from using the said cart track.

(iii) On 27.06.1999, the defendants restricted the plaintiffs from using the said cart track, therefore, they filed the suit for relief of declaration of cart track in favour of the plaintiffs and for permanent injunction from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the cart track.

4. The brief averments of the written statement fi