- (1.) Legal representatives of plaintiff No. 1-Om Parkash along with plaintiff Nos. 2 and 3 have filed the instant second appeal.
(2.) Suit was filed by plaintiff No. 1-Om Parkash since deceased (represented by appellant Nos. 1 to 4) and appellant Nos. 5 and 6 as plaintiff Nos. 2 and 3 and proforma respondent No. 8-Balwan Singh as plaintiff No. 4 against Haryana State, Central State Farm (defendant Nos. 1 and 2) and private defendant Nos. 3 to 7. The plaintiffs alleged that for their land detailed in paragraph 1 of the plaint, they have 2 karams vide passage through land of defendant Nos. 1 and 2 and also through land of defendant Nos. 3 to 7 as mentioned in the headnote of the plaint. The plaintiffs claimed that they have been using this passage for 40 years and, therefore, they have acquired right of easement by prescription. There is also no other passage for their land and, therefore, they also have right of passage by easement of necessity. Accordingly, the plaintiffs sought declaration about the disputed passage and also sought necessary injunction etc.
(3.) Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 in their separate but similar written statements broadly denied the plaint allegations and pleaded that there is no passage through their land as claimed by plaintiffs.;