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…!
A pathway slightly raised to facilitate vehicle entry is permissible if it serves as the only access to a property or compound, especially when it is used by the public or multiple landowners. For instance, the court recognized the pathway as a 'street' used by multiple plot owners ["PUSHPA PAUL vs T M SANTHAMMA Advocate -SRI BECHU KURIAN THOMAS (SR - Kerala"], and in another case, the pathway was essential for access, with the court emphasizing its importance for vehicle ingress ["Sandhya T.P. W/o K.M. Surendran Soumya vs M. Suresh Babu S/o Samikutty - Kerala"].
Restrictions and Conditions on Pathway Alterations
Construction or modification of pathways, such as raising or narrowing, must not impede vehicle access or violate existing rights. In one case, the court noted that raising the pathway height was not allowed if it restricted vehicle entry ["KATTATHURAI VILLAGE PANCHAYAT vs MADHAVAN PILLAI - Madras"], and reducing the breadth of a pathway could prevent vehicle access, leading to dismissal of claims if such restrictions are imposed ["KATTATHURAI VILLAGE PANCHAYAT vs MADHAVAN PILLAI - Madras"].
Use of Raised Pathways
Making a pathway slightly raised for vehicle entry is generally acceptable, provided it does not obstruct or alter the fundamental right of access. The court has approved modifications like raising the pathway when it is necessary for vehicle ingress and does not infringe upon other rights ["Pappachan, S/o. Issahac VS Alex, S/o. Joseph - Kerala"].
Public and Private Access Considerations
When pathways serve as the only access for multiple owners or the public, courts tend to uphold their use and allow minor modifications for vehicle entry, as long as such modifications do not block or permanently restrict access ["Sandhya T.P. W/o K.M. Surendran Soumya vs M. Suresh Babu S/o Samikutty - Kerala"], ["PUSHPA PAUL vs T M SANTHAMMA Advocate -SRI BECHU KURIAN THOMAS (SR - Kerala"].
Summary
Conclusion:Raising a pathway in front of a land plot for vehicle entry is permitted if it facilitates access without infringing on established rights or causing obstruction. Courts have upheld such modifications when they serve as essential access points, especially when used by multiple owners or the public.
Imagine owning a plot of land where easy vehicle access to your compound is essential, but the existing pathway is too low. You decide to slightly raise it for smoother entry. But is this modification legally allowed? Many property owners in India face this dilemma: a pathway in front of a plot of land was slightly raised to make sure of the vehicle entry into the compound—is it allowed?
This common query touches on municipal regulations, public rights of way, and property laws. In this post, we'll explore the legal stance, drawing from key judgments and principles under Indian law. Note that while this provides general insights, it's not specific legal advice—consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
Under Indian law, pathways—especially those adjacent to public roads or used by the community—are regulated to balance private property rights with public interests. A pathway slightly raised for vehicle entry is generally permissible if it complies with municipal or town planning rules, doesn't encroach on public rights, and meets maintenance standards. [
#PropertyLawIndia, #VehicleAccessLegal, #PathwayRegulations
In such interior junction of practically no traffic there is no justification for providing further splay from the very small plot of 5 cents of the petitioner so as to prevent entry of vehicle to the car porch and house for which the petitioner obtained occupancy certificate after proper inspection ... There can be no dispute now raised by the petitioner that the construction of the compound wall did not require a permit. 4. ... The construction created an impediment insofar as the new wall impeding a ....
A4 document, they were having any other entry to the property other than ‘C’ schedule pathway. ... A has certain land to which a right of way is annexed. A lets the land to B for twenty years. The right of way vests in B and his legal representative so long as the lease continues.” 17. The illustration shown under a href=".. ... C1 report and also C1(a) plan specifically shows that the original entry into the plaint ‘A’ schedule property is through the ‘C’ schedule pathway. ... C) Th....
The height of the pathway was not raised by the fourth defendant. The plaintiff is not entitled for declaration or for mandatory injunction. If the breadth of the pathway is reduced, the fourth defendant could not take any vehicle to enter the pathway and the suit is to be dismissed. ... There was a pathway of 5 links on the southern side of the compound wall. When the plaintiff was working abroad, on Auguest 2000, the defendants entered into the property and #HL_STAR....
No pathway will be left or allowed to be used inside the Temple compound. ... If there is any wide opening providing vehicle entry to the temple compound, that should be closed leaving only walking space. Further orders will be passed later in the matter. ... They have suggested that 3 ft. pathway earmarked inside the boundary wall on the western side of the Temple may be allowed to be used for the pathway by removing the ....
That petition was allowed directing the police to render necessary protection for maintenance of the compound wall already constructed. In the aforesaid case also, the appellant raised all the contentions which are now raised in these appeals. ... It was vehimently argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that since compound wall of the property was completely constructed blocking his entry into the road/pathway, he has been confined in the compound#H....
That petition was allowed directing the police to render necessary protection for maintenance of the compound wall already constructed. In the aforesaid case also, the appellant raised all the contentions which are now raised in these appeals. ... It was vehimently argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that since compound wall of the property was completely constructed blocking his entry into the road/pathway, he has been confined in the compound#H....
That petition was allowed directing the police to render necessary protection for maintenance of the compound wall already constructed. In the aforesaid case also, the appellant raised all the contentions which are now raised in these appeals. ... It was vehimently argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that since compound wall of the property was completely constructed blocking his entry into the road/pathway, he has been confined in the compound#H....
During the pendency of the suit, an amendment was sought to amend the B schedule pathway having an extent of 19 metres in length and 3 metres in width, which was allowed. ... Neither Ext.A1 settlement deed nor any subsequent document make out a case for easement by grant. At best, Ext.A2 could only be construed as a permission to use the pathway in question, which will not ripen into any right. ... Before concluding, this Court needs to address another issue raised in this appeal. ... An easement by gra....
acquired land. ... From the eastern public road I entered into a small pathway on the northern side of which is the boundary wall of a shopping complex and on the Southern side is a canal, leading to the residential plot of Sri. Mohana Pai. Ex Fire Station Officer Sri. ... The fire force department is free to park their vehicles anywhere in their property, but without blocking the entry of vehicles to the petitioner's house. ... The respondents shall not in any way obstruct such access to the petitioner's property either....
Resultantly, this appeal is allowed and the suit is decreed as follows,- (1) The right of the appellants to use the pathway at a width of three feet along plaint C schedule portion adjoining to the compound wall of the Church property, which is plot No ... The right of easement is one which a person claims over a land that is not his own. Since the right of easement is a precarious and special right claimed over the land of another, the pleadings must be precise. 23. In Justiniano An....
While being so, the defendants 1 & 2 are threatening to put up construction and make entry to reach their property by using the suit pathway and to make a provision to draw water into suit pathway. The defendants 3 to 8 are also threatening to open the doorway and windows in their western wall abutting the suit pathway. In fact, the legal heirs of the Annamar Naicker orally divided the entire A schedule property and they made provision to have access to their respective shares with the two feet lane situated on the eastern extremity of the A schedule property. They have abs....
It is also to be noticed that in his cross-examination the appellant has stated that previously there was a six feet wide pathway adjacent to his plot but he is unable to state as to whether the value of the adjacent land has increased or decreased after the construction of a 100 feet wide road was begun. The oral testimony of the appellant that the land in question was two furlongs from the Sheopur Bazaar is also not corroborated by any other documentary or oral evidence. Though the appellant has tried to draw a parallel between the land of Smt. Kamla Devi and his own land....
7. The blue coloured plot marked as 3 is the property held by the 1st defendant. Plot 6 which is the eastern portion of the pathway/road was formed after getting the land surrendered by the 5th defendant who is holding Plot No. There is nothing on record to show that as per Ext.
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
