JUDGMENT:- This is a second appeal by Vidya Sagar and Ram Sunder, defendants 1 and 2, respectively; Ram Das plaintiff-respondent No. 1 filed a suit against Vidya Sagar and Ram Das, defendants 1 and 2 Puddan defendant No. 3 and Razi Haider defendant No. 4. The plaint allegations were that the plaintiff held certain agricultural plots mentioned in para 1 of the plaint; to the North of these plots exists plot No. 340 which originally belonged to Puddan, respondent-defendant No. 3, and to the immediate West of the said plot there is plot No. 354 in the tenancy of Ram Sunder, defendant No. 2. Puddan sold the western part of plot No. 340 to Vidya Sagar, defendant No. 1 appellant. There existed a 10 Ft. wide passage over plot No. 340 in western extreme where it meets plot No. 354. The plaintiff claimed to have been using this passage for going to his southern fields and had also been taking his bullocks and cows over this passage to his fields. He, therefore, claimed having acquired easementary right by prescription over this passage. It was alleged that the appellant Vidya Sagar had made an encroachment over this passage by constructing an Abata. It was further alleged in the plaint that

Click Here to Read the rest of this document