JUDGMENT

Radha Krishna, J - This is the plaintiff's appeal and arises out of a suit for perpetual in-junction against the defendants restraining them from obstructing the plaintiff in going over abadi plot No. 199 and bringing water from a well in that plot. The plaintiff came to Court on the allegation that his shop is situated on plot No. 201 in qasba Pachhim, patti Sukhnandan, tahsil Purwa, district Unao, and that he had acquired a right of easement to go over plot No. 199 for the purpose of bringing water from the well thereon. The defendants' house is situated on plot No. 198 and they claimed to be in possession of plot No. 199 as their sahan darwaza. The plaintiff along with the relief for injunction claimed the demolition of the khain alleged to have been recently built by them along the boundary between plots Nos. 201 and 199. The trial Court held that plot No. 199 was not the sahan darwaza of the defendants and although the plaintiff had not been in enjoyment of the right of easement claimed by him for the full prescriptive period and had enjoyed it only for the seven years just before the suit, yet he was entitled to a decree against the defendants who were mere trespassers, and therefore decreed the suit. In appeal the learned Additional Civil Judge held that the finding of the trial Court that plot No. 199 was not the sahan darwaza of the defendants' house was not correct. He further differed from the view of the trial Court to the effect that a person in enjoyment of an easement even for a lesser than the statutory period had a right of action against a mere trespasser.

2. The plaintiff has come up in second appeal and the same two points have been agitated before me. The plan prepared by the Commissioner appointed by the trial Court shows the situation of the plaintiff's shop, the well and the way to it from the plaintiff's shop, the defendant's house and that portion of' plot No. 199 which is claimed by them as their sahan darwaza. A mosque on plot No. 199 forms the western boundary of the alleged sahan darwaza. A glance at this plan will show that that portion of plot No. 199, which is in dispute, is just in front of the defendants house. The width and the shape of it is such that it raises a strong presumption that the whole of it must be in the use of the defendants as their sahan darwaza. The finding of the Court below to the effect that plot No. 199 was sold t6 the defendants as sahan darwaza of their house No. 198 is based among other evidence upon Ex. A-1, which is a sale deed in favour of the defendants of the house on No. 198. This sale deed, which is dated 25th October 1915, describes the property sold in the following language:

One qita house kham musallam with sahan darwaza and one pucca well situated on that sahan darwaza, number of house 117 and number of ahata 198, and one qita pucca house uftada with one nim tree, number of house 116 and number of ahata 197, all situated in qasba Pach-chim, mohalla Wazirganj, as owned and possessed in right of inheritance by the executants as owners, and they out of their free will and desire sell the entire property mentioned above and owned by them, excepting the pucca well, in favour of Mt. Husain Bandi, daughter of Husain Khan and widow of Ewaz Khan, in lieu of Rs. 55....

3. The boundary of the house No. 198 is shown in the deed as follows:

East-Rasta,

West-Arazi parti,

North-Rasta,

South-House of Angara Shah.

4. It is not disputed that the defendants are the representatives of the vendee mentioned in Ex. A-1. The trial Court in view of the fact that the western boundary was given as arazi parti doubted the case set up by the defendants that the land in suit was their sahan darwaza. The lower Appellate Court on the entire evidence on record came to the conclusion that at the time of the sale deed the door of the house on plot No. 198 was towards the west, that the land in suit was the. sahan darwaza of the defendants and that the arazi parti mentioned in Ex.