Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

6. The case of the 1st respondent herein, who is the plaintiff in O.S.No.164 of 1996, is that the suit property, i.e. cart track is situated in Old S.F.No.371/B (New S.F.No.743/2, 8 and 9 of Archalur village, Erode taluk which has to be reached through Old S.No.371/B (new S.F.No.743/1) leading from Erode to Kangayam main road. The land measuring 7.93 acres in S.F.No.371/B originally belonged to one Nachi and after his demise, one of his sons, Kali Parayan sold 1/3rd common share measuring 2.64 acres to the 1st defendant's grandfather, Vembana Gounder, whose 4th son is the father of the 1st defendant inherited Ac.0.66 ½ cents out of 2.64 cents purchased by his grandfather Vembana Gounder, while his another son, namely Chinnappa Gounder inherited Ac.0.66 ½ cents from his father. On 10.2.1995, the 1st https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis respondent herein purchased 0.66 cents and thereby, he became owner of Ac.1.32 cents. While so, the only access to the 1st respondent's lands in Old S.F.No.371/A (New S.F.No.743/1) is through a 12 feet width south card track, marked as ABCD in red colour in the plaint schedule on the western end of R.S.No.743/2,8 and 9, which is in existence more than 75 years. Therefore, the 1st respondent is entitled to use the cart track as an easement of necessity and easement by prescription. While so, due to enmity, the appellant/defendant obliterated the suit cart track and on questioning the same, he promised to restore the same, but failed to restore the same. Hence the suit.