SUDHA S ALVA Vs. SANJEEVI R SHETTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the defendants against the judgment and decree of the lower appellate Court by which the judgment and decree of the trial Court dismissing the suit has been reversed and consequently the same is decreed granting the relief of permanent injunction as claimed by the plaintiff.

(2.) Plaintiffs filed a suit inter alia seeking a relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from causing obstruction to the road as shown in the sketch appended to the plaint. It is the case of the plaintiff that there was a 6 feet wide path-way leading from Gurupura Kaikamba to the plaintiffs' house situate in Survey No.32/ 19 of Kandavara village running through various properties including Survey No. 129/2 belonging to the 1st defendant and Survey No. 129/3 belonging to the second defendant. His further case is that six years prior to the filing of the suit, the said path-way was widened by the Panchayat up to about two miles converting the same into a pucca road of about 18 feet width. From that point the plaintiffs claim that they, with the help of other residents of the locality broadened the said pathway into a road of about 15 feet width up to the plaintiffs' house in Survey No.32/19 and this road passed through Survey Nos. 129/1,129/2, 129/3 and, thereafter, entered the properties in possession of the plaintiffs. This widening was done with the consent of persons who are in possession of the respective properties through which the road passed.

(3.) It is contended by the plaintiffs that the road was formed at the very same place where the pathway existed earlier. It is the further case of the plaintiffs that the pathway has been in existence from time immemorial and only the widening of the pathway into a road was done five years ago. It is contended that the defendants who are in possession of Survey Nos. 129/2 and 129/3, had given their consent for the widening of the pathway into a road in their properties. It is contended that ever since the formation of the road, the plaintiffs, their men and other persons residing in the locality have been making use of the road. It is contended that the defendants have no manner of right to cause any obstruction to the road. It is further contended that the defendants have dug trenches of about l' depth across the road at points A, Band C as shown in the plaint sketch which according to the plaintiff is a high-handed action. The plaintiffs claimed that they have acquired right of user of the pathway over the land of the defendants by prescription and mamool and that the widening of the path into a road was done with grant made by the defendants. It is further case of the plaintiffs that the defendants have no right to cause any obstruction to the plaintiffs' enjoyment of the road and, therefore, the defendants are liable to restore the road to its original condition at points A, B and C shown in the plaint sketch.