JUDGMENT

1. This and the connected appeal arise from the same suit in respect of a plot of land lying between the homesteads of the parties. On 15th March, 1927, the defendants-appellants enclosed the plot by putting up boundary walls. The plaintiff sued for possession of the land by removal of the boundary walls in the right of ownership. In the alternative, he claimed a decree for his right of easement of way through his southern door and the right to discharge water from his drain across the land in dispute and for an injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the said rights.

2. The parties are neighbours. The plaintiff purchased his house under a sale-deed dated 31st May, 1912. The defendants acquired their house under an earlier sale-deed dated 21st April, 1893. A portion of the defendant's house fell into ruins more than 20 years before suit and. the land remained vacant for this long period till the defendants constructed the boundary walls.

3. On 12th January, 1927, the parties had referred their disputes to the arbitration of five persons including the umpire. An award was given on 15th March, 1927. The award was against the plaintiff who impugned its validi