to respondents 2 to 5 to claim a right of quasi easement over the said road even in the absence of absolute necessity. To attract quasi easement it is sufficient that the way was apparent and continuous during co-ownership and till transfer, bequest or severance and it is necessary for the enjoyment of the property. Section 13(b) of the Easements Act makes it clear that if the way is apparent, continuous and necessary for the enjoyment (as against absolute necessity) of the dominant tenement as it was enjoyed before by the transfer or bequest took effect, the transferee or legatee, unless a different intention is expressed or necessarily implied is entitled to such easement. There is nothing on record to show that there was any contrary intention express or implied between the parties while Exts.A3 to A5 were executed in favour of respondents 2 to 5 that other than plaint D schedule, any other road will be provided for access to the plaint A to C schedules. In the above circumstances, the trial and first appellate courts are justified in finding that respondents 2 to 5 have acquired right of quasi easement over plaint D schedule and granting injunction accordingly.
