Defendants 3 to 8 in O.S.No.1267 of 1987 on the file of the Second Additional District Munsif Court, Coimbatore who were respondents 3 to 8 in A.S.No.1 of 1998 on the file of the Principal District Court, Coimbatore, being aggrieved by the order of remand dated 211. 1998 made in A.S.No.1 of 1998 have filed the above appeal.

2. For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to as per their ranking in the suit.

3. The case of the plaintiff is as follows:-

In Chettipalayam village, Coimbatore Taluk a Temple known as Arulmigu Kanniamman Karuppasami Thirukkovil is in existence for the last 300 years. The main gate of the Temple faces east. There is also a gate on the west of the rear of the Temple which is invariably closed. There are compound walls on all the sides. The only passage to the Temple is on the north along with the elevated portion of a bund. The Temple is situated to the east of the main Coimbatore Chettipalayam Road. Immediately on the north of the Temple a big kuttai measuring an extent of 2 acres is located but its extent got reduced due to the encroachment made by the first defendant. Immediately adjoining the Temple on the north a large area of an elevated portion of kuttai exists. The kuttai belongs to the Government and as a portion has been trespassed upon by the first defendant, the Government has been added as the second respondent as a proforma party and no relief is sought for against the Government. It is the further case of the plaintiff that the elevated portion of kuttai measuring 15 feet east-west lying on the north of the Temple is absolutely necessary to protect the Temple from sudden inundation and it constitute the passage of the Temple for several centuries. The first defendant who was in possession and enjoyment of S.F.No.221 abetting on the north cut a portion of the elevated bund on the north-west corner and obstructed the easy passage to the north and east. S.F.No.221 itself is a classified poramboke for which the first defendant got patta excluding the plan marked kuttai. The first defendant had gradually encroached into the kuttai leaving only the elevated bund of the kuttai and small area on the north and east. After the suit was filed and before the Advocate Commissioner visited the property on 22.06.1987 the first defendant who was then alive destroyed the elevated bund on the north to a distance of about 20 feet east-west and two feet deep making it difficult for the people to reach the Temple. In the said circumstances, the plaintiff filed a suit seeking the following reliefs:-

.(i) declaring the rights of the plaintiff to use the passages and open spaces marked in the plan.

.(ii) For a consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the first defendant (defendants 3 to 8) and/or his men from interfering with the aforesaid rights of his men from interfering with all the aforesaid rights of altering the physical features of the passage of the bund in any manner.

(iii) direct the defendants to restore the portion of the bund east-west and 2 feet deep (north-south) with north slope within a time to be fixed by this Court, failing which permit the plaintiff to carry out the same and recover the cost from the defendant by executing the decree and for the cost of the suit.

.4. The first defendant contested the suit by filing a detailed written statement contending as follows:-

.The first defendant is the absolute owner of the lands in S.F.No.532/B-1 measuring 1.2 acres and Survey No.222/1 measuring 8.36 acres and comprised in patta No.423. Survey No.532/B-1 is abetting the Chettipalayam Main Road and Survey No.221/1 is situated on the east of Survey No.532/B-1. The said entire extent lies as a single block bounded on the west by Chettipalayam Main Road by the east-west public itteri in Survey No.655/B and 22 on the north the lands in survey Nos.219 and 222 on the south; and by the east-west car track leading to Survey No.225 (sub-divided as 532/B2 and 221/2) an