Challenging the judgment of learned First Additional Subordinate Judge, Erode, passed in A.S.No.58 of 2005 dated 07.03.2006, the second appeal have been filed.

2. The plaintiff is the appellant before this Court. The suit filed by the plaintiff seeking declaration of his right to take vehicle of all types, cattle and men to the alleged pathway and perpetual injunction restraining defendants 2 and 3 and there means from interfering the plaintiff's right to use the said pathway was not found in favour of the plaintiff by the Courts below. Hence Second Appeal.

3. The contention of the appellant is that he purchased 0.12.5 acres of land in survey no.63/3A from one Mariammal and others vide sale deed dated 01.06.1972. According to the plaintiff the larger extent of land in the said survey no.63/3A was held by the common owners and they have divided into parts of 25 to 30 cents each with an express understanding, the purchase will have right of pathway on the extreme Southern and extreme East to connect Water Works Road on the western side and Krishnampalayam Road on the Northern side. Such a pathway is absolutely necessary for ingress and egress of the plot owners by the plainti