Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
O
¦
(On appeal from the judgment dated 14-1-1999 of the Lahore High Court passed in C.R. No.
1976 of 1998).
' ()*++c,
M. Nisar Arshad Kotla, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab,
Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
-.'¦#
3. The trial Court through judgment dated 25-6-1995 decreed the suit by holding that the
respondents-plaintiffs had right to use the said passage. An appeal was filed by the petitioner
which was dismissed by the First Appellant Court through judgment dated 21-7-1998 by
affirming the findings of the trial Court. It was also held that the said passage was the only
approach to the house of the respondents-plaintiffs and had been commonly in use. The
petitioner filed revision petition before the Lahore High Court which has been dismissed through
the impugned judgment dated 14-1-1999 against which leave is sought.
4. It was argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that-the respondents before succeeding
in the suit had to establish that they had prescriptive right or right of easement. They having
failed to do .so, therefore, the suit was liable to be dismissed.
5. We have gone through the record and find that a finding of fact has been recorded that the said
passage was not part of the property of the petitioner and that the same was being used as
passage by the respondent and was the only source of approach to his house, therefore, case of
easement of necessity had been established, therefore, the findings recorded by the Courts below
do not suffer from any legal infirmity.
Q.M.H./M.A.K./N-63/S
% %