1. The plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from obstructing and also for mandatory injunction directing the defendant to remove obstruction raised by them in front of the doors of the northern wall of the plaintiff's land. The trial Court dismissed the suit on the ground that the passage alleged to have been enjoyed by the defendant for about 60 long years was not established. Ultimately, the suit was dismissed. But the First Appellate Court in the appeal preferred by the plaintiff observed that there had been two old gates on the northern wall of the plot of the plaintiff to go through the property of the defendant and that, therefore, the plaintiff was entitled to protect his easementary right. Ultimately the First Appellate Court decreed the suit for permanent injunction.

2. The following substantial questions of law in the presence of the learned counsel appearing on either side were formulated:-

1)Whether a relief for permanent injunction based on easementary right can be sought when no relief for declaration of easementary right was prayed for by the plaintiff.

2)Whether the First Appellate Court rendered a perverse finding w