N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, J.

1. Plaintiff is the appellant. His suit for injunction was dismissed by the Trial Court. The counter-claim filed by the defendants was decreed. The appeal filed by the plaintiff was dismissed. There was a family settlement evidenced by Ext. B1 entered into between the parties to the suit and other parties. Ext. C4(a) is the plan relied upon by both sides. Plot No. 1 is the plaint A Schedule property. Plot No. 2 in Ext. C4(a) is the plaint B Schedule property. Plaint C Schedule takes in Plots 4 and 6 shown in Ext. C4(a). Item No. 7 belongs to the defendant. As per the terms of Ext. B1 the defendant was to get only a right of way from the road. It is contended that Ext. C4(a) will go to show that the plaintiff had surrendered 54.9 Sq. metre land for the formation of the pathway in favour of D4 and D5. Instead the plaintiff obtained 35.7 Sq. metre of land for widening the C Schedule pathway. The fact that the pathway having a width of 10 feet was formed taking in Plot Nos. 4 and 6, is not disputed. But the core of the issue is whether the plaintiff is having absolute right over the said pathway and whether the plaintiff is entitled to put up a compound w