While interpreting the document not only the contents have to be kept in mind, but the real intention of the parties is also to be determined. The form in which the document is styled is inconclusive for determination of intention of the parties. In this document it is nowhere mentioned that it was a sale Deed. The intention of the […]

The principle of promissory estoppel is applicable to administrative law and not between the private parties. Mis-interpretation or misconstruction of document on which claim of a party is based amounts to substantial question of law and such error can be corrected in Second Appeal The Madras High Court in the case of Ramakrishna Doss Chandrathna Doss Vs. P. Kesavalu Chetty […]

The Indian Easements Act, 1882 33. Suit for disturbance of easement. – The owner of any interest in the dominant heritage, or the occupier of such heritage, may institute a suit for compensation for the disturbance of the easement or of any right accessory thereto; provided that the disturbance has actually caused substantial damage to the plaintiff. Explanation I. -The […]

As existence of both a dominant tenement and servient tenement is essential to the creation and existence of an easement it is difficult to conceive of a position where a person can claim easement by prescription when he owns both the tenements. It may be permissible in the plaint to advance an inconsistent plea of ownership and easement alternatively, but it is necessary that the plaintiff should press one of them only either at the stage of evidence or a subsequent stage. When the dominant and servient tenement are in the ownership and possession of the same person acts done by him on the servient tenement are clearly referable to his possession of that tenement and hence there cannot be any easement by prescription,

Recent Updates