1. The first respondent, being the owner of certain property, has an anodyne desire of raising a compound wall around his property. He began his efforts in 2005 and could not fulfill that to this day.

2. The petitioners, the neighbours, contend that if the first respondent is to construct a compound wall around his property, that may come in the way of their enjoying the only pathway leading to their properties, for the construction would lead to shortening of the pathway. In fact, the first respondent has been driven to multiple rounds of litigation, the present writ petition being the only exception, since it is filed by the neighbours, rather than the first respondent himself.

3. The facts, stated in brief to the extent necessary, are that the petitioners, 9 in number, are neighbours to the first respondent, making use of the pathway to the west of the first respondent's property. Initially, the first respondent filed a suit against respondents 1 and 4 herein and others and obtained a decree for perpetual injunction against those persons from interfering with his right to enjoy his property. Later, the first respondent approached this Court complaining of delay on the