RAM SAHAI Vs. MAN SINGH
LAWS(ALL)-1949-1-7
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on January 04,1949

RAM SAHAI Appellant
VERSUS
MAN SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Bind Basni Prasad, J. - (1.) This is a plaintiffs appeal arising out of a suit in which the prayer was that the plaintiffs have a right to discharge the rain water from five spouts from the roof of their house. As regards three of the spouts, the defendants admitted the plaintiffs' right. The dispute was about only two of the spouts. Learned Munsif decreed the claim. The defendants went in appeal and the learned Civil Judge dismissed the plaintiffs' claim in respect of spouts C and D shown in the sketch map forming part of the decree of the trial Court.
(2.) The finding of the learned Civil Judge is that the roof of the room from which these two spouts discharge water was formerly flat. The water dropped in the defendants' courtyard. Sometime thereafter, the flat roof was converted into a thatched roof with two thatches-one discharging water from its eaves towards the plaintiffs' courtyard and the other towards the defendants' courtyard. The thatched roof remained in existence for more than two years. After that, about twelve years ago, the flat roof was again made with two spouts discharging the rain water upon the defendants' land. Again there was a thatched roof in place of the flat one and the thatched roof has now been reconverted into a flat one discharging water through the two disputed spouts. It is not disputed that the plaintiffs have been discharging water upon the defendants' land for more than twenty years. For some period the water has fallen from the eaves of the thatch and for some period through the two disputed spouts. Learned Civil Judge thinks that as the discharge of water through the two spouts has not been proved for twenty continuous years, the right of easement has not been established. It is necessary to examine the relevant statutory provisions on the subject.
(3.) Section 15 of the Easements Act, 1882, provided for the acquisition of easements by prescription. Paragraph 3 of that section runs as follows: "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 right to such ..... easement shall be absolute." To this is added Explanation II which runs as follows: "Nothing is an interruption within the meaning of this section, unless where there is an actual cessation of the enjoyment by reason of an obstruction by the act of some person other than the claimant, and unless such obstruction is submitted to or acquiesced in for one year after the claimant has notice thereof and of the person making or authorizing the same to be made.";


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.