You have informed that your late father owned 10 cents of land in Kerala, which he divided equally between you and your brother, giving 5 cents each. Your brother’s portion is road-facing, while your plot lies behind it. Your father had informally left about 1.5 to 2 feet of space along your brother’s side for your use as access. However, after your brother sold his plot, the new purchaser has occupied the entire frontage and constructed a building, leaving you without any physical access to your property. There is no registered right of way or mention of pathway in any title document. You are now surrounded on all sides by private properties and wish to know your legal options to secure access.
Under Indian law, including the Indian Easements Act, 1882 and corresponding case law, when a property becomes landlocked—that is, without any access to a public road—the owner of that property is entitled to claim a right of way by necessity over the adjoining land that provides the most reasonable outlet to the public road. This right is known in law as an easement of necessity and is a legally enforceable right recognised by courts.
Section 13 of the Easements Act provides that when a property is divided by transfer or partition, and as a result one portion cannot be enjoyed without using another portion, an easement of necessity is implied in favour of the land that requires access. In your case, when your father divided the original 10 cents, he created two separate ownerships, and the rear portion (your plot) was evidently dependent on the front portion for access. Hence, an implied right of way of necessity came into existence at the time of division. Even though the pathway was not mentioned in the sale deed, the law presumes that such a right exists if the land cannot be accessed otherwise.
You may therefore initiate legal proceedings by filing a civil suit for declaration and mandatory injunction before the Munsiff’s Court having jurisdiction over the property. In that suit, you may pray for a declaration that you are entitled to an easement of necessity over the portion of the land that was previously part of your father’s property (now belonging to the purchaser), and seek a direction to the defendant to allow and maintain a pathway for ingress and egress to your plot. The court will appoint a local commissioner or surveyor to inspect the site, verify boundaries, and report the most suitable alignment of the pathway.
As to the width of the pathway, there is no fixed statutory measurement; it depends on the necessity, topography, and existing usage. Courts in Kerala have generally recognised pathways varying from 3 feet (for pedestrian access) to 8–10 feet (for vehicular access) depending on the practical need and the nature of the land. Since your father had left only about 1.5 to 2 feet informally, the court may allow a slightly wider path if it is found necessary for reasonable enjoyment of your property, but not more than what is necessary. If you can show that the land is residential and that vehicular access is reasonably required, the court may fix the width accordingly, usually between 4 to 6 feet for car or small vehicle entry in narrow localities.
Regarding compensation, Section 14 of the Easements Act states that the owner of the servient land (the land over which the pathway is granted) is entitled to compensation for the loss caused by the imposition of the easement. The compensation amount is determined by the court based on the area used and the market value. In Kerala, courts typically calculate this as the market value of the small strip of land used for the pathway, or a lump sum payment sufficient to offset the inconvenience caused. The amount is usually modest because the easement is a legal right, not a purchase of ownership.
As for the approximate cost of legal proceedings, the total cost may vary by district and by advocate’s seniority. For a case of this nature filed before a Munsiff’s Court, your court fee and documentation expenses may range between ₹5,000 to ₹15,000. Lawyer’s fees for filing and conducting the suit up to final decree may range from ₹40,000 to ₹1,00,000 depending on complexity, location, and number of hearings. If a local commissioner is appointed, an additional fee of approximately ₹10,000–₹20,000 may be required for survey and report. Overall, a practical budget of around ₹75,000 to ₹1,25,000 would cover the entire process. Duration varies between 8 months to 2 years, depending on local court pendency.
As for your query whether it is possible to obtain access through another large plot lying behind your land that has a road connection, the answer is yes, but only with consent of that landowner or upon payment of fair compensation. Legally, the court will prefer granting a pathway over the property that was originally part of the common ownership (your father’s land) because that is the natural servient tenement. Only if that access is impracticable or blocked beyond use would the court consider an alternative route through another neighbour’s land, in which case compensation will be higher.
To summarise, your lawful and practical course is to first issue a legal notice to the current owner of the front plot asserting your right of way of necessity, and if there is no amicable settlement, proceed with a civil suit for declaration and injunction to establish that right. The pathway width will be determined by the court as per necessity, usually between 3 to 6 feet. Compensation, if any, will be assessed by the court according to the area and inconvenience caused.
