Easement passes with dominant heritage; later purchaser cannot override a prior registered arrangement supporting the right.

An easement is a right attached to the beneficial enjoyment of the dominant heritage, and it cannot be transferred separately from that land; however, it passes with transfer of the dominant heritage under the Easements Act and the Transfer of Property Act. The note also explains that a subsequent purchaser pendente lite cannot displace a prior registered arrangement establishing an easementary claim where the earlier agreement and connected conveyances support the transfer. The practical effect is that a registered transfer of the dominant land may carry the easementary facility, and later purchase alone does not defeat that right.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether an easementary right attached to the dominant heritage could be transferred along with the transfer of the land. (ii) Whether the subsequent purchaser pendente lite could successfully challenge the plaintiff's claim based on the earlier registered agreement and the connected sale deeds.

Issue (i): Whether an easementary right attached to the dominant heritage could be transferred along with the transfer of the land.

Analysis: Section 4 of the Indian Easements Act, 1882 recognises an easement as a right attached to the beneficial enjoyment of the dominant heritage. Section 6(c) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 bars transfer of an easement apart from the dominant heritage, but does not prevent the easement from passing with the transfer of the dominant heritage. The registered agreement and the subsequent sale deeds showed that the plaintiff acquired the dominant land together with the easementary facility over the cart track.

Conclusion: The easementary right validly passed with the transfer of the dominant heritage and the plaintiff's claim was sustainable.

Issue (ii): Whether the subsequent purchaser pendente lite could successfully challenge the plaintiff's claim based on the earlier registered agreement and the connected sale deeds.

Analysis: The earlier parties to the registered agreement did not contest the matter effectively, and the subsequent purchaser had entered the scene later. A purchaser pendente lite may contest the suit, but cannot displace a prior registered arrangement establishing the plaintiff's easementary right merely on the basis of later purchase. The plaintiff's title and easementary claim were supported by the earlier registered document and the connected conveyances.

Conclusion: The subsequent purchaser could not defeat the plaintiff's easementary right.

Final Conclusion: The decree in favour of the plaintiff was upheld and the second appeal failed.

Ratio Decidendi: An easement cannot be transferred separately from the dominant heritage, but it passes with the transfer of that heritage, and a subsequent purchaser cannot override a prior registered easementary arrangement duly supported by the transfer of the dominant land.

---