Short Note On Easement Under the Indian Easement Act, 1882

Definition and Concept

An easement is a legal right that allows a landowner (dominant owner) to use another’s land (servient tenement) for a specific purpose, such as access or utility, while restricting certain uses. The Indian Easements Act, 1882, under Section 4, defines easements as rights held by a person over the land of another to benefit their own land.

Key Terminology

1. Dominant Tenement: The land benefiting from the easement.
2. Servient Tenement: The land on which the easement is exercised.
3. Affirmative Easement: Allows actions on the servient tenement (e.g., right of way).
4. Negative Easement: Restricts certain actions on the servient tenement, like obstructing light.

Types of Easements

1. Appurtenant Easement: Transfers with the dominant land (e.g., right of way).
2. Easement in Gross: Personal and does not pass with land ownership (e.g., fishing rights).

Creation of Easements

1. By Grant: Formalized by agreement between parties.
2. By Prescription: Acquired through 20 years of uninterrupted use under Section 15.
3. By Necessity: Implied easement when land access is otherwise impossible.
4. By Custom: Established local customs can sometimes give rise to easements.

Termination of Easements

1. By Release: Dominant owner voluntarily surrenders rights.
2. Unity of Ownership: Both lands merge under one ownership.
3. By Abandonment: Non-use for 20 years can extinguish an easement.
4. By Extinguishment: Major alterations in servient land making the easement impractical.

Key Provisions and Relevant Case Laws

• Section 7 allows for easement rights such as light, air, water, and passage.
• Section 13 governs easements by necessity, ensuring access to otherwise landlocked properties.

Case Laws:

1. Sinha Ramanuja Jeer v. Ranga Ramanuja Jeer:

This case highlighted easements of necessity, confirming that when access is critical for property use, it becomes an absolute right.

2. Sukhdev Vihar Residents Welfare Association v. Union of India (2009) –

This case emphasized that an easement right by prescription requires continuous and uninterrupted use for at least 20 years. The court held that consistent and unchallenged use over time can establish a prescriptive easement, but any interruption in use may break the claim.

3. T.R. Appasami Ayyangar vs Narayanaswami Iyer And Ors. on 28 March, 1930 –

This case emphasized that to claim a prescriptive easement, the use must not only be continuous and uninterrupted but also peaceful and without permission. The ruling underscored that continuous use signifies a claim of right that cannot be intermittent or reliant on consent from the servient owner.

4. Yeshwantrao Laxmanrao Ghatge v. Baburao Bala Yadav (1978):

Emphasized that sporadic use cannot establish a prescriptive easement, underscoring consistent use as a legal requirement.

Doctrine of Lost Grant

This doctrine presumes an easement agreement if there has been continuous use for 20 years, suggesting an original, now-lost, grant.

Conclusion

Easements secure practical rights for property enjoyment without transferring ownership. They balance the interests of dominant and servient owners, facilitating access and preventing conflicts. The Act, supported by case law, provides a framework that strengthens property rights while respecting land use boundaries.