This second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 21.12.2000, passed in A.S.No.44/99, on the file of Subordinate court, Madurantakam, reversing the judgment and decree passed in O.S. No.201/96, dated 24.08.99, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Madurantakam.

2. Parties are referred to as per their rankings in the trial Court.

3. Suit for permanent injunction.

4. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, is that he is the absolute and exclusive owner of the plaint schedule properties and they are his own patta lands and the plaintiff has filed the original patta and chitta extract to show the ownership of the suit properties and there is no pathway in the plaint schedule properties and however, the defendants with their henchmen attempted to form a road in the plaint schedule properties from the 4th of March 1996 and the same had been resisted by the plaintiff, the defendants are attempting to form the pathway to the burial ground and the Government i.e., the panchayat had already formed a pucca road adjacent to the suit property and there is a thaar road going across the suit survey numbers, which is clearly sub divided and even in the village plan, no pathway has been shown in the plaint schedule properties and on the other hand, inasmuch as the defendants are attempting to form the pathway in the plaint schedule properties and thereby interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the suit properties by the plaintiff, according to the plaintiff, he has been necessitated to lay the suit for appropriate reliefs.

5. The case of the defendants, in brief, is that the suit is not maintainable either in law or on facts and the suit properties are only assignment lands and the plaintiff has not purchased the same and his title is not admitted and there is a battai passing through the suit properties to the burial ground and the cremation ground and under the guise of the ex-parte order of injunction, the plaintiff has tried to close the access and the cremation and burial ground is comprised in survey number 164/2B lying to the south of survey number 157/3 and the residential colony for the harijans is situated to the north of survey number 157/3 and the cremation and burial ground comprised in survey number 164/2B is made for the harijans and only through survey number 157/3, the dead bodies are being carried to the burial and cremation ground and the survey number 157/3 originally was in the possession and enjoyment of Valluvanainar by name Sivapatham and thereafter Natarajan and thereafter, on the colony getting improved and moved towards south, they had left their houses in survey number 157/3 and thereafter, the plaintiff has been cultivating some lands hither and thither, without causing any inconvenience to the public. However, after obtaining patta, he started putting fence and on being questioned, it is stated by the plaintiff that, to prevent the cattle trespass he had put up the fence and would remove them whenever any dead body is taken to the burial and cremation ground. However, the plaintiff is attempting to close the access of the road reaching the burial and cremation ground and after the convening of the panchayat, he has fully removed the fence and to the knowledge of the plaintiff, the public had been using the pathway to reach the cremation ground from their colony and the plaintiff has suppressed these facts and has laid the suit and at the time of grant of patta in favour of the plaintiff, it was assured by him that he would never object or prevent anybody from using or accessing to the burial or cremation ground and only thereafter, the patta was granted in his favour. Had it been objected by the plaintiff earlier, the public would have also objected for the grant of patta in favour of the plaintiff and there is no cause of action for the suit and the suit has not been framed properly and without the relief of declaration, the plaintiff's suit for permanent injunction is not maintai