1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court in A.S.No.30 of 2004 dated 29.07.2004 in allowing the appeal by setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the I Additional District Munsif, Bhavani in O.S.No.355 of 1999 dated 17.09.2003 in dismissing the suit.

2. The plaintiff is the appellant and the defendants are the respondents.

3. The case of the plaintiff before the trial Court would be thus:-

3(1) The property mentioned in the schedule hereunder and herein after called as the suit property is a Natham Poromboke. It has been called as 'Pavadi' Rathukana Theru from the time immemorial by the general public. The Bhavani town is well known for its textile goods like handloom, carpets, Bedsheets, Handloom sarees and towels for more than hundred years. Mostly the people of Sengundha Mudaliar weaving community are residing around the suit property. More than 1000 families are living on their wages earned by weaving the above said textile goods.

3(2) The weaving community and their predecessors around the suit property are using the same as 'Pavadi' for more than 100 years. They are using the suit property for storching their yarn and to do some other works pertaining to the same such as processing of yarn more than 100 years without any interruption for the above said period. In view of the user of the suit property, the street which runs along the southern side of the same is being called as 'Pavadi' street for more than 100 years. The weaving community has a right of easement over the suit property. They have also perfected their easementary right as enjoyment of the community has been exercising such a right over the suit property without any interruption for more than 100 years. The community has no other place to be used as a 'Pavadi' and hence they are entitled to use the same easement.

3(3) While so, during the year 1969, the then panchayat Board, proposed to erect a public stage to hold public meeting in the suit property and on finding the user of the same by the community people and said proposal was dropped. Further, when the same panchayat proposed to pass a resolution to use the suit property for running a vegetable market in the year 1976, the proposal also was dropped in view of the long user and its necessity for the weaving community. Whileso, on 6.1.1983 a meeting was held in the Tahsildar's office regarding shifting the existing vegetable market on the road side. The said meeting was attended to by the general public, politicians, officials of the Revenue and Municipality and ended with the proposals of shifting the market to the weekly shandy which was being kept idle and is very near to the existing market. The said decision was dropped on the representation of the weaving community.

3(4) Subsequently the vegetable market shifted to some other place. Hence, the suit property is continuously used as Pavadi. On 14.7.1999, the second defendant along with the officials removed the stones in the Pavadi and kept them in Taluk Office. Inspite of representation by the plaintiff, the second defendant removed all the stones in the suit property. The second defendant had no manner of right to remove the stones. The plaintiff submits that the stones were embedded in the earth for a very long period. In these circumstances, the action of the second defendant is illegal and not maintainable in law. Hence, the plaintiff has filed the suit for mandatory injunction to restore the stones in the suit property. Further, as the defendants are illegally attempting to obstruct the plaintiff's community people of using the suit property, as Pavadi, the plaintiff seeks the relief of declaration of their easementary right and for the permanent injunction against the defendants. Hence, the suit.

4. The contentions raised by the defendants before the trial court would be thus :-

The allegations made in para 3 of the plaint that the suit property is a Pavadi situated in