Horwill, J.

1. The defendants have been found by the lower Appellate Court to have dug a channel through a part of the village site, and that portion of the channel which passes through the village site also runs in front of the house of the plaintiffs and lies between their house and the well. The plaintiffs have therefore brought this suit on behalf of the village community for a mandatory injunction requiring the defendants to block up that part of the channel. Which lies within the village site. The only point argued in appeal is whether the suit is maintainable. I do not think there can, be any doubt that the plaintiffs can have no cause of action unless they suffered special damage from the construction of this channel; and I do not consider that the construction of this channel is anything more than a common nuisance. It seems to me equally clear that the only manner in which a common nuisance can be abated is for a suit to be brought Under Section 91, Civil P.C. with the permission of the Advocate General. It has been argued in support of the judgment of the lower Court that the whole community of the village could bring a suit for the abatement of this nuisance; but