Oldfield, J.

1. The plaintiffs, the appellants, hold survey fields Nos. 46, 63 and 64 of Tirumananjeri village. Of the defendants, the respondents in the two second appeals, the first to ninth and eleventh defendants are ryots, whose alleged interest in the irrigation, the subject of dispute, the Secretary of State, the tenth defendant has protected by the issue of orders in the Revenue Department. It is admitted that the channel immediately adjacent to the plaintiffs lands is the Mylan channel, belonging to the Cauvery system. But, as the plan, (Exhibit A) shows, there is a short distance to the west the Mangudi Channel in the Vikramanar system. The plaintiffs contended that they were entitled to take water by a kanni or subsidiary channel, running east from Mangudi to Mylan and so to their fields, though they would obviously affect the supply from the former, on which first to ninth and eleventh defendants depend, by doing so. The channels are artificial and there is therefore no question of natural right; nor is any grant relied on by plaintiffs. Their case, in favour of which the District Munsif found, was based on prescription, that is, on Section 15 of the Indian Easem