1. The unsuccessful plaintiff in both the courts below is the appellant.

2. The case in brief is as follows: — The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration that he has got the right to use the cart track and also for mandatory injunction directing the authorities to remove the electric post, to remove the fence and also to remove the cut trees from the cart track. Item one of the property was purchased by the plaintiff from the first defendant and others under the document dated 21.04.1972. Item 2 of the property was purchased from one Chellammal, wife of Etti Gounder under a re gistered document dated 01-07-1970. Similarly, item 3 of the property was purchased from one Ponnaiyan Gounder under a registered document dated 12.06.1970. There is clear description in the boundary referring to the use of mamool cart crack. The plaintiff has been using the said cart crack from the date of purchase. He had been taking cattle and also manure to his lands through this cart track. Excepting the suit cart track, the plaintiff is not having any other cart track. During March 1983, defendants 1 to 4 with the connivance of the electricity Department attempted to put up an electric post a