R. Sengottuvelan, J.

1. This appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff in O.S. No. 831 of 1977, who lost his case before both the courts below.

2. The brief facts of the case giving rise to this second appeal are as under-The suit property, comprises an extent of 60' x 40' in S.F. No. 371/2. It was originally a blind alley, which was not used as a public road and later on, the Municipal Council after obtaining the sanction of the State Government under Exhibit B1, dated 24th July, 1972, sold the same to one Panneerselvam under Exhibit A1, dated 9th May, 1974, who sold the same under the original of Exhibit A2 in favour of Ramasubbu Iyer, representing the appellant herein. The area mentioned in the sale deed is 60' x 35' i.e., an area of 2,100 sq. ft. But the blind-alley measured 60' x 40'. The case of the plaintiff is that the sale under Exhibit A1 is by boundaries and all the land comprised within the four boundaries mentioned in Exhibit A1 passed on to the vendee, Panneerselvam under the original of Exhibit A2. On the other hand, the case of the Municipal Council as well as the other respondents herein is that only an extent of 60' x 35' was sold to the appellant's predece