the same would suggest that the name of the plaintiffs' forefathers Rathinaswamy Dhas, Elayaperumal and Sivaraman were mentioned as the person in possession of the suit property. In column No.12 of 'A' Register, it was also mentioned as 'Nilaviyal Pathai' (pathway on ground). Therefore, the revenue document produced by the plaintiffs Ex.A1 is the only worth while document filed by the plaintiffs to prove the possession of their forefathers over the suit property. It is settled law, a person, who produced the document cannot rely on one part of the document and refuse the entry in the other part of the document. In the case on hand, in Column No.11 of Ex.A1, the name of the plaintiffs' forefather were mentioned as the persons, who are in possession of the suit property. Likewise in Column No.12, the suit property was described as 'Nilaviyal Pathai'. Therefore, though Ex.A1 is useful to prove the possession of the plaintiff over the suit property, the same also establishes the defendants' case that the suit property is a Nilaviyal Pathai or public pathway on ground. The plaintiffs have not filed any title document or patta, etc., to prove their exclusive possession over the suit property. Therefore, it is clear that the suit property is not private property of the plaintiffs and the same is classified as 'Nilaviyal Pathai' meant for use of general public. In such circumstances, the Courts below
