The trial Court settled issued as per rival pleadings and recorded evidence of both parties. The trial Court, vide judgment dated 28.02.2008 observed that factual position as depicted by plaintiff in his plaint stands corroborated by the report of Court Commissioner which is available on record. The trial Court observed that it is not in dispute that open piece of land belongs to Nagar Palika, Kekri and neither plaintiff nor private defendants have any ownership rights over the same. If Nagar Palika, Kekri chooses to sell open piece of land treating the same as strip of land to private respondents defendants, it has right according to permissible rules, hence, no orders on this issue are required to be passed by the Court. The trial Court declined to interfere in the regular affairs of Nagar Palika, Kekri in respect of its right and jurisdiction to sell out their piece of land. In relation to right of private defendants to raise construction over the open piece of land and thereby to close the gate and window of plaintiff is concerned, the trial Court has already passed a decree in prohibitory form against defendant No.3 vide its judgment dated 28.02.2008 as indicated above. So far claim of easementary right of plaintiff is concerned, the trial Court has observed that it is not in dispute that plaintiff has opening of his property towards the eastern side and he has right of access to his property from the main road from eastern side. It has been noticed that channel gate opened by plaintiff in his shop at ground floor towards southern side is an alternative gate. In such factual matrix the trial Court has observed that for the property of plaintiff, he has his right of access, easement or having a right of way, air and light from eastern side. As such, the claim of easement from southern side through the
