(1.) The Appellants herein are the legal representatives of the deceased first defendant in the suit filed by the respondents 1 to 4 herein. The plaintiffs have filed a suit for relief of declaration restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property.
(2.) The facts necessary to decide the Second Appeal is extracted below:
(3.) The case of the plaintiffs has been denied by the defendants stating that the plaintiffs have given a wrong measurement and boundaries of the suit schedule property. There is no lane in "B" schedule property as alleged in the plaint. The "B" schedule property and the property lies on the north of "B" schedule property with measurement east-west 30 feet and north-south 40 feet belongs to the defendants and one Kaluvarayan. Later, the Kaluvarayan sold the portion of land at south measuring east-west 30 feet and north-south 20 feet. The "B" schedule property never remained as a lane. Neither plaintiffs nor the predecessors-in-title enjoyed it. "B" schedule property form part of the 2nd defendant property. The measurement given by the plaintiffs in the suit schedule are incorrect. Therefore, the suit is liable to be dismissed.