Himachal Pradesh High Court Rejects Prescriptive Easement Claim for Failure to Identify Pathway

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has reiterated that a prescriptive easement cannot be established through a vague assertion of long use; the claimed pathway itself must be clearly pleaded, identified and proved.

Property dispute before the Court

Tara Chand sought declaration of a right to use a path through the defendants' land, claiming more than twenty years of uninterrupted use by himself and his predecessors.

The trial court decreed the suit, but the first appellate court reversed that decision after finding the alleged path insufficiently established.

Legal issue and reasoning

Justice Rakesh Kainthla noted that the pleadings did not clearly identify the entry and exit points of the route. Witnesses also referred to another common path adjoining the property.

The site sketch was not proved through its maker, and the alleged pathway did not appear in the revenue record despite a recent settlement.

Result

The High Court upheld the appellate court's refusal to recognise a prescriptive easement and dismissed the second appeal. It also confirmed that the appellate court could reverse the decree under Order XLI Rules 4 and 33 CPC even though one defendant had not appealed.