1. The controversy in appeal here concerns access to a vacant plot. This vacant plot of the plaintiff-Balbir Singh lies behind the premises let out by him to the defendant-Sawan Singh and as would be apparent from a reference to the site plans on record, namely exhibits P/1, P/2 and D/3 and as also so found by the lower appellate Court, the only passage to it lies through the site on rent with Sawan Singh.

The point arising for consideration now being - whether the plaintiff can claim a right to use this passage and the defendant be consequently restrained from obstructing him from doing so. This right is claimed as an easement of necessity.

2. According to the case as set up by the plaintiff, he had been passing through the site on rent with the defendant for going to his vacant plot behind it. The entry to this vacant plot being through a door marked X in the site plan exhibit P/2. It was specifically averred that there was no other way for going to this plot except through the land in the occupation of the defendant. It was said that since the last 3 or 4 months, the defendant had stopped the plaintiff from going through his land and had also closed the door at point X .