The issue that engages the attention of this Court in this case is whether a person can be permitted to take recourse to parallel remedies on the same issue or substantially the same issue. In other words, whether this Court can decline jurisdiction on the principle of abstention?

2. The petitioner proclaims to be the owner in possession of an extent of 42.50 cents of land comprised in survey number 735/4 of Amballur village. While the eastern boundary of his property abutting the PWD road is protected by a compound wall, the western boundary abutting Nadavazhi (footpath), which is now maintained by the second respondent Panchayat, has no compound wall. The very Nadavazhi is said to have been formed by acts of voluntary surrender of land by those persons who hold their properties on either side of the said Nadavazhi.

3. Topographically, the Nadavazhi begins from the house of the petitioner and goes further forward towards "Karukapadam Road'' (Vazhi). The entire Nadavazhi is uneven in its width, with a breadth of 4 meters at the beginning but varying at places from 2.5 meters to 3 meters till its end.

4. The foundation for litigation has been laid when the petitioner tried to l