Sunil Thomas, J.

1. The appellants herein who are the appellants in A.S. No. 54 of 2013 of the lower appellate court are aggrieved by the dismissal of I.A. No. 774 of 2013, by which they sought an ad interim order of prohibitory injunction.

2. The first appellant is the owner of the plaint A schedule property and the first respondent is his brother. On the western side of the A schedule property, there are properties belonging to the respondents herein. The appellant claimed that a thondu on the western side was developed jointly by the appellants and the respondents into a wider way. After widening it, first respondent allegedly started claiming exclusive right of the way and attempted to block it. Hence, a suit was filed seeking an injunction with respect to the plaint B schedule way. After trial, the suit was dismissed which was carried in appeal by the plaintiff, to the appellate court. Along with the appeal, an interlocutory application was filed seeking an interim injunction against the respondents therein. The court below by impugned order dismissed the interlocutory application, which is the subject matter of this appeal.

3. The respondents appeared and raised a prel