Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Paving Tile Over Way Without Obstruction and Continuing Use as Before & Prescriptive Easement
The existence of an alternate route does not automatically extinguish a prescriptive easement; the user’s long-standing, exclusive use can still confer rights (Chirakkal Sankaran Nair, [Died; Lrs Impleaded] S/O. Sreedevi Amma VS Ponguzhi Parambath Sreedharan Nair [Died] - 2024 Supreme(Ker) 956 - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 956).
Impact of Paving and Use:
If the paving is done without obstructing the pathway or hindering its use, the prescriptive easement is typically maintained.
Continuity and Use as Before:
Obstructions or interference with the use after paving can jeopardize the easement claim, but mere paving or improvements are generally not considered obstructions if the pathway remains accessible (RADHAMANI vs INDIRAMMA - 2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 47522).
Legal Insights and Case Law:
The presence of alternate routes does not negate prescriptive rights if the user has established long-standing, exclusive use of a particular pathway (Chirakkal Sankaran Nair, [Died; Lrs Impleaded] S/O. Sreedevi Amma VS Ponguzhi Parambath Sreedharan Nair [Died] - 2024 Supreme(Ker) 956 - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 956).
Additional Considerations:
Analysis and Conclusion:Paving a pathway over a way that has been used openly and peacefully for over 20 years generally does not affect the prescriptive easement, especially if the use continues as before and the pathway remains accessible. The key factors are uninterrupted, long-term use and the absence of obstruction or interference. Improvements like paving tiles are typically permissible unless they hinder the easement holder's right to passage. Therefore, continuing use of the same route after paving, without obstruction, usually does not negate prescriptive easement rights (R.V. Ganesha Bhatta, S/O Late Venkataramana Bhatta vs State Bank Of Mysore - 2025 Supreme(Kar) 696 - 2025 0 Supreme(Kar) 696, RADHAMANI vs INDIRAMMA - 2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 47522, Chirakkal Sankaran Nair, [Died; Lrs Impleaded] S/O. Sreedevi Amma VS Ponguzhi Parambath Sreedharan Nair [Died] - 2024 Supreme(Ker) 956 - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 956).
Imagine you've been using a shared pathway to access your property for decades—openly, continuously, and without permission. Then, someone paves it with tiles. Does this simple improvement wipe out your hard-earned prescriptive easement? This is a common concern for property owners navigating neighbor disputes or land access issues.
In this post, we dive into the legal question: Whether paving tiles over a way without obstruction and continuing use as before affects a prescriptive easement. Drawing from key legal documents and case insights, we'll explore how courts typically view such modifications. Remember, this is general information based on referenced sources—not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified attorney for your situation.
A prescriptive easement arises when someone uses another's land openly, continuously, hostilely (without permission), and as of right for a statutory period—usually 20 years. This use prescribes a legal right to continue accessing the path.
Key requirements include:- Continuous and uninterrupted use for 20 years Shanti Conductors(P) Ltd. VS Assam State Electricity Board - 2016 0 Supreme(SC) 680.- Open and notorious—visible to the property owner Jogeswar Gayan VS Moti Ram Borah and Ors. - 2002 0 Supreme(Gau) 184.- Hostile and adverse—not permissive Prativa Mahapatra vs State of Odisha - 2024 Supreme(Online)(ORI) 774.
As one source notes: where a right of way or any other easement has been peaceably and openly enjoyed by any person claiming title thereto, as an easement, and as of right, without interruption, and for twenty years V.J.MATHEW vs SURENDRAN - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 50214.
Main Legal Finding: Paving tiles over a way used continuously and openly as a pathway, without obstructing or altering its nature, generally does not affect the prescriptive easement—provided the user maintains the same manner of use and essential characteristics remain unchanged Shanti Conductors(P) Ltd. VS Assam State Electricity Board - 2016 0 Supreme(SC) 680.
Courts focus on whether the core elements persist:- Continuity and openness remain critical Jogeswar Gayan VS Moti Ram Borah and Ors. - 2002 0 Supreme(Gau) 184.- Minor improvements like paving don't extinguish rights if use stays hostile and consistent P. V. Lav Kumar Reddy VS State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Secretary, Education Department Secretariat - 2022 0 Supreme(AP) 225.
For instance: Small modifications that do not change the mode of use or the hostility do not affect the easement Jogeswar Gayan VS Moti Ram Borah and Ors. - 2002 0 Supreme(Gau) 184. Similarly, mere surface improvements, such as paving, do not amount to obstruction or a change in the nature of use, and thus do not negate the prescriptive right P. V. Lav Kumar Reddy VS State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Secretary, Education Department Secretariat - 2022 0 Supreme(AP) 225.
Paving with tiles is often seen as a neutral upgrade. If the pathway remains accessible and use continues as before, the easement holds. Legal documents emphasize: the act of paving the pathway with tiles, in itself, does not necessarily disrupt these elements if the user continues to use the way in the same manner and without permission Shanti Conductors(P) Ltd. VS Assam State Electricity Board - 2016 0 Supreme(SC) 680.
From additional sources: Use of a pathway, even if it involves paving or improvements like interlocked tiles, does not necessarily negate prescriptive rights, provided the use was peaceable and without interruption (drawing from R.V. Ganesha Bhatta, S/O Late Venkataramana Bhatta vs State Bank Of Mysore - 2025 0 Supreme(Kar) 696, RADHAMANI vs INDIRAMMA - 2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 47522). Courts recognize that improvements like paving or beautification do not extinguish easement rights if the use remains continuous and peaceable.
Several references reinforce this position:- Section 15 of the relevant Act: as right relating to access and use of light or air... having been peaceably enjoyed... without interruption for 20 years R.V. Ganesha Bhatta, S/O Late Venkataramana Bhatta vs State Bank Of Mysore - 2025 0 Supreme(Kar) 696. Paving doesn't interrupt if unobstructed.- In disputes over pathways: they have been exercising the said prescriptive right of easement peacefully and without any obstruction ever since the date of purchase Hanamanth Bhimappa Sankannavar vs Holabasappa Channappa Yamakanamardi - 2025 Supreme(Kar) 410 - 2025 0 Supreme(Kar) 410.- Alternate paths don't defeat claims: the mere existence of an alternate way will not militate against the claim for prescriptive easement right [Chirakkal Sankaran Nair, [Died; Lrs Impleaded] S/O. Sreedevi Amma VS Ponguzhi Parambath Sreedharan Nair [Died] - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 956](https://supremetoday.ai/doc/judgement/01500055059).
One case highlights: the plaintiff claimed prescriptive easement right over the way... continuous and hostile use to the knowledge of the other person C. I. Prakasan, S/O. Balan Panicker VS C. I. Bhanu, S/O. Kelappan Panicker - 2023 Supreme(Ker) 187 - 2023 0 Supreme(Ker) 187, Kallen Devi VS Raghavan - 2011 Supreme(Ker) 1009 - 2011 0 Supreme(Ker) 1009. Even after property changes, prior prescriptive use persists unless interrupted Marthoma Syrian Church Represented By Most Rev. Dr. Joseph VS Jessie Thampi (Died) W/o. Late Sri. P. C. Thampy - 2020 Supreme(Ker) 172 - 2020 0 Supreme(Ker) 172.
U.S. analogies note prescriptive easements can coexist with improvements without affecting core rail or access rights Norfolk S. R.R. Co. v. Dille Road Recycling, LLC - Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, Norfolk S. R.R. Co. vs Dille Road Recycling LLC - 2024 Supreme(US)(ca6) 246 - 2024 Supreme(US)(ca6) 246; similar logic applies to pathways.
Not all paving is harmless. Consider these scenarios:- Obstruction or alteration: If tiles make the path impassable or change its character (e.g., from dirt to restricted paved area), it may interrupt continuity P. V. Lav Kumar Reddy VS State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Secretary, Education Department Secretariat - 2022 0 Supreme(AP) 225.- Permissive use: Paving with owner's permission suggests non-hostile use, negating prescription Prativa Mahapatra vs State of Odisha - 2024 Supreme(Online)(ORI) 774. Permission or permissive use can negate hostility Shanti Conductors(P) Ltd. VS Assam State Electricity Board - 2016 0 Supreme(SC) 680.- Significant changes: If the paving is done in a manner that obstructs or significantly alters the manner of use... the prescriptive easement could be affected.
Additionally: Obstructions or interference with the use after paving can jeopardize the easement claim, but mere paving... is generally not considered obstructions if the pathway remains accessible (from R.V. Ganesha Bhatta, S/O Late Venkataramana Bhatta vs State Bank Of Mysore - 2025 0 Supreme(Kar) 696, RADHAMANI vs INDIRAMMA - 2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 47522).
To protect your interests:- Document everything: Photos, witness statements, and usage logs prove continuous use.- Continue as before: Maintain the same access pattern post-paving.- Avoid permission: Don't acknowledge or seek approval, preserving hostility.- Monitor changes: Challenge true obstructions promptly.
To preserve a prescriptive easement, continue using the pathway in the same manner and without permission that indicates permissiveness Shanti Conductors(P) Ltd. VS Assam State Electricity Board - 2016 0 Supreme(SC) 680.
In summary, if you've paved or had a path paved without blocking access and continue using it as always, your prescriptive easement is typically safe. For tailored guidance, reach out to a property law expert.
Disclaimer: This analysis is based solely on cited documents (e.g., Shanti Conductors(P) Ltd. VS Assam State Electricity Board - 2016 0 Supreme(SC) 680, Jogeswar Gayan VS Moti Ram Borah and Ors. - 2002 0 Supreme(Gau) 184, P. V. Lav Kumar Reddy VS State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Secretary, Education Department Secretariat - 2022 0 Supreme(AP) 225, Prativa Mahapatra vs State of Odisha - 2024 Supreme(Online)(ORI) 774, R.V. Ganesha Bhatta, S/O Late Venkataramana Bhatta vs State Bank Of Mysore - 2025 0 Supreme(Kar) 696, etc.) and general principles. It does not constitute legal advice.
#PrescriptiveEasement, #EasementRights, #PropertyLaw
Section 15 of the Act which deals with prescriptive easement states that as right relating to access and use of light or air and for any building having been peaceably enjoyed by any person claiming title thereto as of right without interruption for 20 years. ... Whether the defendant further proves that, the suit is suffers "from the law of res-judicata? 6. Whether the plaintiff entitl....
The use of plaint C schedule as a pathway to plaint A schedule property is also not in dispute. Though plaintiff claims a prescriptive right of easement over plaint C schedule way, that has been concurrently found against the plaintiff by the courts below. ... When the defendant attempted to beautify the plaint C schedule way paving interlocked tiles, O.S.No.84/2012 was filed. That suit ....
(e) That they have been exercising the said prescriptive right of easement peacefully and without any obstruction ever since the date of purchase, and that they have no other access to their lands. ... Whether the plaintiffs further prove that the suit way is the only way to approach their lands for the purpose of agricultural operation? 4. Whether th....
Whether the suit has wrongly been decreed for declaration of right of passage by way of easement of custom and prescription to pass through the suit land without establishment of the said claim while to the contrary, the existence of the alternate general public path adjacent to the house of the plaintiff ... It was also held that on the basis of oral and documentary evidence on record, the existence of passage on Khasra N....
![Chirakkal Sankaran Nair, [Died; Lrs Impleaded] S/O. Sreedevi Amma VS Ponguzhi Parambath Sreedharan Nair [Died] - 2024 Supreme(Ker) 956](https://supremetoday-s3.b-cdn.net/Kerala_small_3.png)
Of course, the mere existence of an alternate way will not militate against the claim for prescriptive easement right. ... It is the plaintiff's case that the way was being used by his predecessors and he is continuing such user. He is entitled to tack on the user by his predecessors to complete the prescriptive period, it is claimed. ... (ii) Does the plaint contain sufficient and prop....
thereto, as an easement, and as of right, without interruption, and for twenty years, the right to such access and use of light or air, support or other easement shall be absolute. ... (2) Whether the plaintiffs prove that they have got prescriptive easementary right to use the p style="text-align: center ... —Where the access and use of lig....
Padmanabhan [1988 (2) KLT 417] wherein a distinction between right of way acquired by grant as well as easement by necessity has been dealt with and it has been held that the question whether an easement is one acquired by grant or as of necessity is not to be decided on the absolute necessity of it. ... Many easement acquired by grant may be absolutely necessary for the enjoyment of the dominant tenement....
As the STB outlined in Jie Ao & Xin Zhou: [A] prescriptive easement does not take railroad property outright, and it is often possible for an easement that crosses over, under, or across a right-of-way, to co- exist with active rail operations without necessarily interfering with ... Because such easements do not affect the rail network in the same #HL_START....
Because such easements do not affect the rail network in the same way as carving out property that is part of a railroad, and because a prescriptive easement may still allow the railroad to access the property, the Board has previously found that property disputes involving prescriptive ... As the STB outlined in Jie Ao & Xin Zhou: [A] prescriptive #HL_STA....
pressure or by things affixed thereto, as an easement, without interruption, and for twenty years, and where a right of way or any other easement has been peaceably and openly enjoyed by any person claiming title thereto, as an easement, and as of right, without interruption, and for twenty years, the ... Hence such enjoyment has been termed as an easement and it has be....
The plaintiff claimed prescriptive easement right over the way. The suit, though dismissed by the trial court, was decreed in appeal. This Regular Second Appeal is by the defendant in a suit for prohibitory injunction against obstruction of a way described in the plaint 'C' schedule.
The commissioner who visited the property reported its oldage as more than 30 years. Later on, the balance extent of 35 cents including the title over the way set apart in the year 1953 was also purchased under Ext.B3 in the year 1961 by the defendants. The subsequent acquisition of title over the way under Ext.B3 purchase will not alter the right acquired by way of easement by prescription or the incohate right when the party is in the pursuit of acquiring a prescriptive right, unless there i....
Plaintiff claims prescriptive right of easement of way over B schedule. The defendant contested the suit disputing and denying the claim.
While easement of necessity has its origin in a statute, the right of way by easement by prescription is the result of continuous and hostile use to the knowledge of the other person. As already mentioned, the defendants who are the appellants herein claim a right to use the pathway by way of easement by necessity and prescriptive right of easement. While easement of necessity has its origin in a statute, the right of way by easement by prescription is the result of continuou....
v. Jose Jacob alias Thankachan, 2010(4) KHC 167 wherein it was held as follows: While easement of necessity has its origin in a statute, the right of way by easement by prescription is the result of continuous and hostile use to the knowledge of the other person. As already mentioned, the defendants who are the appellants herein claim a right to use the pathway by way of easement by necessity and prescriptive right of easement. As already mentioned, the respondents ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
