- Case Study: In Kalyani v. Devender, the court dealt with the easement of light and air. A has been using a window on B’s property for 30 years to receive light and air. B constructs a building that blocks the window. Can A claim compensation?
a) Yes, if A can prove significant loss due to the obstruction
b) No, as the easement of light and air does not grant a right to claim compensation
c) Yes, but only if the easement has been established for 40 years or more
d) No, unless A can prove the obstruction is unreasonable
- Case Study: In Gurpreet Singh v. Amarjit Kaur, the court ruled on the validity of an easement of necessity. A sells part of his land to B, leaving B’s portion landlocked. A provides B access via a narrow footpath. Can B claim a wider access route?
a) Yes, if the original access route is insufficient for the reasonable use of the land
b) No, as easements of necessity are limited to the existing access path
c) Yes, but only if B provides compensation to A for the additional burden
d) No, unless B’s land is used for residential purposes
- Case Study: In Shyam Sundar v. Himmat Singh, the court addressed easements related to the use of a water stream. A has a right to use water from a stream flowing through B’s property for agricultural purposes. A begins to use the water for industrial purposes, which B objects to. Is B’s objection valid?
a) Yes, as the easement is restricted to agricultural use only
b) No, as A has the right to use the water for any purpose
c) Yes, but only if A’s use depletes the water source
d) No, unless A compensates B for the increased use of water
- Case Study: In Madan Gopal v. Pratap Singh, the court ruled on the rights of a dominant owner when a servient tenement changes hands. A has an easement over B’s property for access to a well. B sells the property to C, who blocks the access. Can A continue to exercise the easement?
a) Yes, as the easement is attached to the land and remains valid even after the property is sold
b) No, as the easement is void after B sold the property to C
c) Yes, but only if C agrees to allow A access to the well
d) No, unless A formally registers the easement with the authorities
- Case Study: In Sushila Devi v. Jagdish Prasad, the court examined easements of necessity in a commercial context. A, a shopkeeper, sells part of their property to B, who is left landlocked. A previously used a path across their land to reach a public road. Can B claim an easement of necessity?
a) Yes, as the easement is necessary for B to access the public road
b) No, as the easement applies only to residential properties
c) Yes, but only if B can prove that A had no other reasonable access
d) No, unless B has a business relationship with A
- Case Study: In Vishnu Prasad v. Rajinder Kumar, the court ruled on the easement of support. A has a building on B’s land, and B constructs a wall to prevent further damage to A’s structure. A objects, claiming that the wall interferes with A’s use of the property. Can A object to B’s action?
a) Yes, as B’s actions violate the easement of support
b) No, as B has the right to protect the land
c) Yes, but only if A’s structure was in good condition
d) No, unless the wall obstructs access to the property
Next Questions are Chapter wise on the Easement Act