1. The plaintiff, who had succeeded before the trial court and lost before the first appellate court is the appellant in this second appeal. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge of Tuticorin made in A.S.No.59 of 1985 in reversing the judgment of the learned District Munsif, Srivaikundam made in O.S.No.350 of 1980.

2. Heard Mr.R.Dhamodaran for the appellant and Mr.P.Peppin Fernando for the respondent.

3. At the time of admission, the following substantial question of law was framed by this Court.

“Whether the lower appellate court was justified in reversing the finding of the trial court without properly appreciating and without giving due consideration to the recitals in Ex.A-1e”

4. For convenience, the parties to this appeal will be referred as arrayed before the trial court.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant after submitting his arguments with respect to the legal contentions submitted that the appellant is choosing the alternative relief of right of easement by necessity and giving up the claim of co-ownership in respect of the disputed pathway. This election made by the counsel for the appellant is