Can a Servient Owner Legally Block an Easement Path?

The plaintiffs did not prove adverse use for over 10 years of a roadway over a definite strip of land in the servient tenement belonging to the defendants. The report of the plaintiffs' surveyor does not support the plaintiffs' claim of prescriptive use. ... If it is the position of the Plaintiffs that the right of way they claim is what is shown as a path in P3 which is not within the purported Defendants' land, namely lot B of the same plan, they have fai....

But the dominant owner's right or selection does not preclude the owner of the servient tenement from changing the situation of the servitude and assigning a different situation from that originally specified by grant or agreement, if this can be done without damage to the owner of the ... Right of way-Acquisition of right by prescription-Right of owner of servient tenement to alter the situation of the servitude-How far principles of the Roman-Dutch law as to right of #HL_START....

It is the right to make property servient to someone other than real owner, and from this the term, servitude is derived." ... No doubt the- servient tenement is not properly described Pleadings do not with certainty support the evidence. ... contiguous lands is a servient tenement and the law says that the owner or owners of each such tenement is under a duty to permit the free exercise by the owner or owners of the dominant tenement of his ri....

In my opinion our law of prescription does not recognize the acquisition by user of servitudes personal to a single individual. Even if the use by the plaintiff of this path had been proved for a third of a century, he would not have acquired right of way. ... to 1893 was not as owner of a dominant tenement, his user previous thereto, though enjoyed for more than ten years, did not create a prescriptive right in his favour. ... - I do not unde....

the purchaser of a lot on the servient tenement, although the defendant was not the owner of the whole of the servient farm or even of the homestead situated thereon. ... The principle is clear; why must the owner of the dominant tenement who claims the servitude be compelled to sue owners of parts of the servient tenement who do not dispute his right to the servitude, why may he not be allowed to sue that owner only who does ....

The first plaintiff began to use this road in his capacity as part owner of the dominant tenement and as one of the successors in title of Joronis. It is true that the first plaintiff was co-owner of the servient tenement, too, up to March, 1920. ... It was contended that the first plaintiff was entitled as such co-owner to use the path in question over the defendants' land. It seems to me that this contention, too, is not sound. In the first pl....

1915 0 Supreme(Mad) 462

The adverbs peaceably and openly qualify the verb enjoyed and indicate the manner in which the dominant owner must conduct himself in his use or enjoyment of the servient tenement; the conduct of the servient owner is immaterial, except so far as it goes to show the nature of the user by the dominant ... There is not a word said about the Easements Act or the Limitation Act in the plaint. The 5th paragraph mentions the use of the path by the plaintif....

The presence, therefore, of stiles at either end of the servient land cannot be said to impede the free use of the path by those who have the right to use it. APPEAL, with application in revision, from a judgment of the Court of Requests, Avissawella. S. B. ... Lekamge has urged that the order is wrong because a person entitled to a foot-path also has a right to use a bicycle or a wheel-barrow over that path, and the stiles will prevent the use#HL_E....

(Voet (8, 3, 8) states that even where no particular path has been used, the owner of the servitude is entitled to claim a right of way over the servient tenement. It was held in Costa v. ... sound, has held that the plaintiff has no right to the use of the particular way claimed by him, and that his right of access to the lane is by the lake shore to the east of the land B and C. ... -- The plaintiff, who is the owner of the land marked A in the plan filed in the record, claims a right of way ....

2016 0 Supreme(HP) 1249

necessity, being available for their apposite user by the contesting defendant/servient owner, imperatively hence with the salient underlying tenet ingraining the customary user by way of easement of necessity of the suit land as a path by the defendant/servient owner standing not satiated. ... Since the principle of easementary right of necessity qua user as a path the land of the servient owner ousts for it to hold legal might, th....

2018 0 Supreme(Guj) 924

Illustrations (a) A has a right of way over B's field, A must enter the way at either end and not at any intermediate point. Exercise of easement: confinement of exercise of easement.- (b) A has a right annexed to his house to cut thatching grass in B's swamp. As per Section 27 of the Act, the servient owner is not bound to do anything for the benefit of the dominant heritage, and he is entitled, as against the dominant owner, to use the servient heritage in any way consistent with the enjoyment of the easement; but he must not do any act tending to restrict the easement or to rend....

2017 0 Supreme(Mad) 1386

The dominant owner must exercise his right in the mode which is least onerous to the servient owner; and, when the exercise of an easement can without detriment to the dominant owner be confined to a determinate part of the servient heritage, such exercise shall, at the request of the servient owner, be so confined. In this connection, as per Section 22 of the Indian Easement Act, it could be seen that:

2011 0 Supreme(Ker) 1086

What is provided under Section 22 is that the dominant owner must exercise his rights in the mode which is least onerous to the servient owner and, when the exercise of an easement can without detriment to the dominant owner, be confined to a determinate part of the servient heritage, at the request of the servient owner, such exercise shall be so confined. The dominent owner must exercise his right in the mode which is least onerous to the servient owner; and, when the exercise of an easement can without detriment to the dominant owner be confined to a determinate part of the serv....

1996 0 Supreme(AP) 185

The dominant owner must exercise his right in the mode which is least onerous to the servient owner; and , when the exercise of an easement can without detriment to the dominant owner be confined to a determinate part of the servient heritage, such exercise shall, at the request of the servient owner, be so confined. Certain acts for the enjoyment of such rights are regulated under Section 24 of the Act. Even the liability for the repairs of any work would be on the dominant owner as employed in Section 26 of the Act. At the same time, the servient owner is not bo....

1993 0 Supreme(Raj) 101

The servient owner is not bound to do anything for the benefit of the dominant heritage, and he is entitled, as against the dominant owner, to use the servient heritage in any way consistent with the enjoyment of the easement; but he must not do any act tending to restrict the easement or to render its exercise less convenient.