JUDGMENT

The plaintiff who unsuccessfully contested the suit for permanent injunction in the Courts below is the appellant herein.

2. The facts are briefly set out herein below and for ease of understanding, the parties are referred to in the same ranking as before the trial Court.

3. The plaintiff had filed the suit O.S.No.65 of 2020 on the file of the District Munsif, Perundurai seeking the relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, agents etc, from in any way and in any manner taking water from the bore well sunk in the first item of the suit property to the second item of the suit property through the first and third items of the suit properties by laying a new underground pipe line along with the existing underground pipe line.

4. It is the case of the plaintiff that one Nallasamy, Sengottaian and defendants 1 to 3 had entered into a registered partition deed on 07.04.1998 in respect of their undivided properties. In the said partition deed, “A” schedule property was allotted to Nallasamy and Sengottian. “B” schedule property was allotted jointly to defendants 1 to 3. On the very same day, the above said persons also entered into an Exchange Deed, under which they had exchanged their properties in R.S.No.398/3 of Pethampalayam Village. The plaintiff would submit that from the said Nallasamy and Sengottaiyan and their family members, the plaintiff had purchased the properties in R.S.Nos.398/2 and 3 of Pethampalayam Village under a registered sale deed dated 27.10.2005. The plaintiff was put in possession of the property on the date of the sale deed and he has been in possession and enjoyment of the same. The plaintiff has also mutated the revenue records in his name. The landed properties in R.S.Nos.398/2 and 398/3 of Pethampalayam village are described as first item and second item of the suit properties respectively. The defendants are owning land in R.S.No.398/3 of Pethampalayam Vilalge which is described as third item of the suit properties The plaintiff would submit that a common well is situate in R.S.No.398/2 of Pethampalyam Vilage. In the common well, there is an electric motor pump set and the electric service connection which the plaintiff's vendor had obtained and the plaintiff is entitled to a common 1/4th share in these. The said common well, electric motor pump set and electric service connection in R.S.No.398/2 are described as fourth item of the suit properties. The plaintiff would submit that the plaintiff and defendants are drawing water from the well in the suit properties from their respective lands by laying underground pipe lines. Such a right of laying underground pipe line for drawing water from the common well has been provided in the Partition Deed dated 07.04.1998 as well. The plaintiff would submit that his vendors has already laid the underground pipe line from the fourth item of the suit property to the second item of the suit property through the first item of the suit property.

5. The plaintiff would submit that the vendors of the plaintiff sunk a bore well, obtained a service connection from the Electricity Board and laid down underground pipe line. The plaintiff had decided to irrigate his lands using a drip system. The defendants have no right to prevent the plaintiff's enjoyment under the Partition Deed dated 07.04.1998. The plaintiff would submit that on 01.06.2020, when he took steps to lay the underground pipeline for drawing water from the bore well from the fourth item of the suit property to the second item of the suit property through the first and third items of the suit properties alongside the already existing underground pipeline, the same was prevented by the defendants. Therefore, he has come forward with this suit in question.

6. The defendants had filed a written statement admitting the relationship, execution of the Partition Deed dated 07.04.1998, allocation of the shares as also the execution of the Exchange Deed dated 07.04.1998. The defendants w