ghfg;gphptpid mf;hpbkz;L'. Though the said document is unregistered the same has been made the basis of the plaintiff's suit and the defendants also relied upon the very same document. The said document contains a specific recital to the effect that the passage belongs to all the four brothers in common. It is also seen from Ex.A3 building plan that has been obtained by the plaintiff, this 20 ft. passage has been shown as 20 ft. wide common passage. In fact, the building plans for all the buildings put up by the defendants in the entire 42 cents of land have been produced as Exs.B5, B12 and B20. In all these documents the passage has been shown as a common passage. The Town Survey Field Register for the passage alone in S.No.11/5 has been marked as Ex.B4, which stands in the name of all the four brothers viz., plaintiff and the defendants. It is therefore clear that the parties intended the pathway to be common to all the four brothers and such intention was reflected in almost all the documents relating to the property. Therefore, the learned trial Judge was not right in concluding that the pathway belongs to the plaintiffs and the 3rd defendant in common. The
