J U D G M E N T

The plaintiffs instituted a Civil Suit bearing No.121-1 of 99/97 before the learned Sub Judge, (v), Shimla, H.P. In the afore Civil suit, the plaintiffs claimed right of easement of necessity over the servient heritage owned by the defendant. The plaintiffs espoused, for theirs being permitted to exercise, on the servient heritage owned by the defendants, the easementary right of theirs trudging thereons, and, the exercisings (supra) by them over the servient heritage, became rested on the pleaded ground of easement of necessity. In the relief clause of the civil suit supra, the plaintiffs prayed for the making of the hereinafter extracted relief:-

…3…

“It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that a decree for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendant from interfering, creating any obstruction or blocking the approach path to their properties comprised in khasra Nos. 792/326/1 and 792/326/2 through the land comprised in khasra No. 793/326/6 and shown by line 'AB' in the attached tatima in any manner and a decree for mandatory injunction directing the defendant to remove the obstruction, if any, found to be created at the time of passing the decree, by th