VARADA REDDIAR Vs. JAYACHANDRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is by two strangers who are not parties to the suit but who feel aggrieved by the ex parte judgment made in O.S. No.619 of 1991 on 24.9.1991, by the learned District Munsif, Tirukoilur.

(2.) RESPONDENTS 1 and 2 herein filed the said suit against the third respondent herein. The third respondent is the trustee of two temples mentioned in the plaint. The suit property also belongs to the temple. RESPONDENTS 1 and 2 claimed themselves as lessees under the Temple for the period 1.6.1991 to 30.6.1992. They said that plaint A and B Schedule items are in their possession on the basis of the lease, which was to expire on 30.6.1992. They filed the suit on the basis that the third respondent herein was about to terminate their lease and reauction the property even before the expiry of the period. They wanted to restrain the Temples from conducting any auction either on 24.7.1991 or on any other date, and that their possession should not be disturbed.

(3.) BY virtue of the decree, the third respondent was prohibited from auctioning or leasing out the property either on 24.7.1991 or on any other date. That means, there was permanent bar or prohibition against the Temple from leasing out the properties even though the plaintiffs had claimed injunction only upto 30.6.1992. It seems, the temple wanted to lease out the property subsequently, and the petitioners were interested in taking the same on lease. But, at that time, some contempt application was moved by respondents 1 and 2 herein on the allegation that the petitioners herein are attempting to trespass into the property, with the active assistance of the third respondent herein. It was at that time, the present civil revision petition was filed under Art.227 of the Constitution of India.