SUNDARASAMY Vs. SHANMUGHAM AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SUNDARASAMY who was the respondent -A party in M.C.No.54 of 1989 on the file of the executive Sub Divisional Magistrate and Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivaganga, a proceeding initiated under S. 145, Criminal Procedure Code by the 3rd respondent herein, has chosen to challenge the sustainability of the verdict of the Court of Sessions, Ramanathapuram at Madurai made in Criminal R.C. No. 35 of 1989 reversing the order of the Inquiring Court holding in his favour.

(2.) RESPONDENTS 1 and 2 in this revision were shown as members of B party in M.C.No.54 of 1989 while the third respondent was the complainant therein. The 3rd respondent sent a report on 5.3.1989 to the executive Sub Divisional Magistrate and Revenue Officer, Sivaganga stating that he expected some law and order problem during sivaratri celebration at Arulmigukaruppanna Swamy Koil, Vani Village, Elayangudi on 6.3.1989. He had prayed for promulgation of an order under S. 145, Criminal Procedure Code.

(3.) THEREAFTER the petitioner filed W.P.No.5616 of 1988 for issue of a Mandamus to forbear respondents 1 and 2 and others from disturbing in any way his officiation as hereditary trustee of the temple pursuant to the order dated 25.11.1980 deciding to appoint respondents 1 and 2 as co -trustees. Pending disposal of the writ petition, the petitioner had prayed for an interim injunction restraining respondents 1 and 2 from interfering with his office as hereditary trustee. On 15.2.1989 the writ petition was dismissed holding that the petitioner was not entitled to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner preferred W.A.No.261 of 1989 challenging the verdict in W.P.No.5616 of 1988. He was again unsuccessful in that the writ appeal was dismissed on 7.3.89. This court observed that the petitioner cannot seek a writ of mandamus for the very same relief after having come upto this Court by way of S.A.No.211 of 1988. However, the appellate court chose to delete the following observations of the single judge in the writ petition