1. Plaintiff in O.S.No.13 of 1978 is the appellant. Her suit for declaration of the right to use the pipe line, motor and pump set for drawing water from the plaint Schedule.56 cents to irrigate her land was dismissed by both the courts below. O.S.No.13 of 1978 was tried jointly with O.S.No.15 of 1978 filed by the first defendant for injunction restraining plaintiff and others from obstructing the flow of water through the pipe connecting the tank in B schedule property and the tank well in A schedule property. That suit was decreed. But the decision was reversed in appeal and that suit was also dismissed. The decision was not appealed against.

2. Plaintiff and first defendant are sisters. They are owners of adjacent lands, which originally formed a compact plot owned by their father Krishnan. He installed a motor and pump set in the tank-well in the land which now belongs to first defendant. The entire land was irrigated through pipes from the tank-well. Supply of water to the tank-well was through underground pipes from a tank in the plaintiff's property. O.S.No.15 of 1978 was filed because plaintiff obstructed flow of water to the tank-well.

3. Now the short question f