HARIPADA DAS Vs. PANCHAMESWARI DASI
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Referred Judgements :-
MADAN V. AKSHOY
MADAN V. SASHI
<RC>LAWSUIT(CAL) 1960 0 336;ILR(CAL) 1961 2 746;</RC>
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
<AT>APPEAL FROM APPELLATE DECREE 415 OF 1956</AT>
<SUBJECT>LAW OF EVIDENCE </SUBJECT><SI>
EVIDENCE ACT,1872 SEC 92;EVIDENCE ACT,1872 SEC 92(2);
<ACT>EVIDENCE ACT,1872</ACT> <S>S.92</S><ACT>EVIDENCE ACT,1872</ACT> <S>S.92(2)</S>
<ADV>RABINDRA NATH MITRA,AMIYA KUMAR MUKHERJEE
SURJA NDRAIN BERA V. CHANDRA BERA
KEDARUDDIN V. SAMSUR MATA
HARAN V. RAMESH
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.)Defendants in the suit for declaration of right of easement inter alia are Appellants here, having lost in both the courts below.
(2.)The Plaintiff sued for a declaration of a right of easement to discharge water from and to receive fish and water into her tank in C.S. plot No. 1048 and for a further declaration that the Defendants have no right to obstruct the inflow and outflow of water therefrom. The Plaintiff further prayed for a permanent injunction against the Defendants restraining them from interfering with the above right and also for a mandatory injunction directing them to remove the obstruction already put up by them and in default for a decree of Rs. 20 as compensation for costs of removal of the same. The learned trial court decreed the suit in part only, in respect of the right to discharge water from the tank in C.S. 1048. There was also an order for removal of the dams within a month and in default the Plaintiff was awarded Rs. 20 as costs of removal. The learned Subordinate Judge on appeal affirmed the judgment and the decree of the trial court.
(3.)No case map was prepared. The Plaintiff purchased plot No. 1048, the alleged dominant tenement on November 15, 1927, from Manu Das, father of Defendant No. 1. Manu Das was the owner of plot No. 1185 which is separated from plot 1048 by a strip of land, plot No. 1186, which is the khas land of the landlord and over which the villagers seem to have acquired a right of way, if the C.S. record is correct. Plot 1186 is on the east of plot 1048. On the east of plot 1186 is Defendant No. l's plot No. 1185, which Defendant No. 1 inherited from his father Manu Das. On the east of plot 1185 is plot No. 1184 belonging to Defendants 2 to 4. On the east of plot 1184 is plot No. 1219, belonging to pro forma Defendant No. 5 and the Plaintiff jointly. By the east of this plot is plot No. 1220 which is a ditch running north to south. According to the Plaintiff this ditch carries water from his tank situated in C.S. plot 1048 through the above there plots. In the record-of-rights plots 1185, 1184 and 1219 are recorded as khanas or low lands. In the record-of-rights there is a mention that Manu Das had a right of boat passage over dag 1184. Against dag 1219 there is a note that (Sic)anu Das and another person (Bhuban Pahari) had a right of boat (Sic) sage over the plot. Defendant No. 2 is Bhuban Pahari.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.