No dispute regarding identity of the property.

The second defendant in O.S.No.196 of 2004 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Krishnagiri is the revision petitioner in the earlier revision C.R.P.No.1411 of 2004 and the plaintiff in that suit is the revision petitioner in the later revision C.R.P.No.1958 of 2004.

2. Earlier revision C.R.P.No.1411 of 2004 is filed aggrieved against the dismissal order dated 10.6.2004 made in I.A.No.370 of 2004 filed under Order 26, Rule 9 read with Section 75(b) C.P.C. to appoint a Commissioner to note down the physical features of the suit properties and to submit a report with plan.

3. Later revision C.R.P.No.1958 of 2004 is filed challenging the correctness of the order dated 4.3.2004 made in I.A.No.291 of 2004 filed under Order 39, Rule 1 read with Section 151 to grant interim injunction restraining the plaintiff from putting up any construction or directing the plaintiff to maintain status quo till the disposal of the suit O.S.No.196 of 2004.

4. The plaintiff filed the suit on 7.3.2003 for declaration and permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 and 2 from trespassing into the suit property and also permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 and 2 from alienating or encumbering the suit property, viz., vacant site in R.S.No.17/1, Kattiganapalli village with specific boundaries measuring east to west 43-1/2 feet and north to south 132 feet totalling 5472 square feet and also vacant site within the same boundaries measuring east to west 79 feet and north to south 49-1/2 feet, totalling 3910-1/2 feet and entire measurement of the suit properties being 9652 square feet and a stone foundation within the boundaries.

5. The plaintiff is the daughter of K.G.Magbool Khan, to whom, admittedly the suit property originally belonged to, in view of the purchase as per sale deed in 1988 and on his death on 26.4.1994, the properties were inherited by his wife Sayeeda Begum, two daughters, the plaintiff and the second defendant and son, the first defendant. In the suit O.S.No.44 of 1995 filed by the second defendant for partition in the Sub Court, Krishnagiri against her mother, Sayeeda Begum; her sister, the plaintiff and her brother, the first defendant; the matter was settled outside Court and as per the compromise petition filed, final decree was passed on 30.8.1996. The first defendant also sold, according to the plaintiff, some of the items allotted to his share in the final decree. It is further claimed by the plaintiff that the plaintiff is in enjoyment of the properties allotted to her share, viz., "C" schedule in the final decree in O.S.No.44 of 1995 and the suit property measuring 9652 square feet is one of items in the "C" schedule. As per final decree, an incomplete cinema theatre on the west of suit property was kept in common between the parties to the suit O.S.No.44 of 1995 for the purpose of discharging the debt of late K.G. Magbool Khan by selling the said property. Though the area of the incomplete theatre is 26,334 square feet as per final decree, actually it measures only 23,388 square feet including the compound wall on all the four sides and the same has been sold by the plaintiff and the defendants jointly and the entire debts of late K.G.Magbool Khan were discharged from the sale proceeds. The purchasers have put up a marriage hall in the incomplete cinema theatre in the name "S.V.V.Thirumana Mandapam" adjoining the western side of the suit property and as such, the suit property lies on the eastern side of the said S.V.V.Thirumana Mandapam. Since the defendants have made claim in the suit property, the suit was filed for the above stated reliefs.

6. The defendants 1 and 2 in the written statements filed separately, though admitted that in the compromise final decree in O.S.No.44 of 1995, 'C' schedule property therein was allotted to the share of the plaintiff, the entire suit property measuring 9652 square feet was not allotted to the plaintiff and the plaintiff is also not in possession of the en