J U D G M E N T

Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 in O.S.No. 43 of 2008 of the court of learned Munsiff, Attingal are the petitioners herein challenging Ext.P10, judgment of learned Sub Judge, Attingal in CMA No. 10 of 2008. Respondent/plaintiff filed the suit for declaration of his right of easement over plaint C schedule pathway and for prohibitory and mandatory injunction. According to the respondent, plaint A schedule belonged to the respondent/plaintiff, while plaint B schedule Item No.I belonged to defendant No.4 and B schedule Item No.2 belonged to petitioners-defendant Nos. 1 to 3. These properties were settled in favour of predecessors-in- interest of petitioners, defendant No.4 and respondent as per settlement deed No. 2577 of 1969. It is the case of respondent that his predecessors- in-interest were gaining access to plaint A schedule situated towards northern side, from the road on the extreme south through plaint C schedule pathway situated along the eastern side of plaint B schedule items. It is also his case that he has no other means of access to plaint A schedule. When petitioners and defenant No.4 attempted to block the way and put W.P.(C) No. 34330 of 2009 2 up certain constr