THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH SECOND APPEAL No.972 of 2009 JUDGMENT: The appellant is the defendant and the respondent is the plaintiff, who filed a suit in O.S.No.577 of 2003 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Madanapalli, seeking declaration of easementary right through ‘B’ schedule property belonging to the defendant alleging that she was enjoying her plaint ‘A’ schedule property by using cart tract i.e., ‘B’ schedule property to reach from Station Road to her fields and except the plaint ‘B’ schedule property, there is no other way to reach the plaint ‘A’ schedule property and an obstruction was caused by the defendant and, therefore, the plaintiff filed the said suit for the relief as referred to above, and also for the mandatory injunction to direct the defendant to remove the obstruction put up by him to pass through the ‘B’ schedule property. Basing on the evidence adduced on behalf of the plaintiff coupled with the Advocate Commissioner’s report, the trial court held that there is no access from three sides i.e., East, West and South except from cart-track i.e., plaint ‘B’ schedule property to reach the property of the plaintiff and the vendor of the plaintiff was also making use of the said plaint ‘B’ schedule property, and accordingly, vide its judgment and decree, dated 20-12-2007, decreed the suit. The lower appellate court, after reappraisal of the entire oral and documentary evidence, dismissed the appeal, confirming the judgment and decree of the trial court. A perusal of judgments of both the courts below goes to show that the trial court, after considering the oral and documentary, rightly decreed the suit. Further, the lower appellate court, after reappraisal of the oral and documentary evidence, rightly dismissed the appeal confirming the judgment and decree passed by the trial court. In view of the concurrent findings recorded by both the courts below, I do not see any question of law, much less substantial question of law that arises for consideration in this Second Appeal. Accordingly, the Second Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 06-11-2009 Prv