1. Plaintiffs in O.S.No.3 of 1989 on the file of the District Munsif’s Court at Periyakulam are the revision petitioners. The revision is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

2. Suit filed by the plaintiffs was one for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with their right over the pathway, demarcated as 'EFGH' in the plaint attached to the Plan, and also for a mandatory injunction to remove the obstruction caused in the pathway.

3. The suit was seriously contested by the defendants. As per the judgment dated 29.10.90, the lower Court dismissed the suit mainly on the ground that the plaintiffs have not prayed for a declaratory relief. The trial Court was of the view that the suit for injunction simplicitor is not maintainable when the right over the property of pathway is denied by the defendants.

4. Against the dismissal of the suit, plaintiffs preferred A.S.No. 29 of 1991 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Periyakulam. Before the appellate Court, additional evidence also let in. The appellate Court found that better opportunity should have been given to the petitioners to prove their case and in case any corre