Non-application of mind in framing an issue whether appeal is allowed or not".

At the stage of admission itself this CRP is taken up for final disposal with the consent of counsel on either side.

2. Heard Mr.T.P.Manoharan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.N.Devarajan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

3. The respondent herein instituted O.S.No.38 of 2001 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thanjavur, praying for a judgement and decree declaring that the Resolution No.8, dated 21.1.2001 passed by the Board of Directors of Rotary Club of Thanjavur Mid Town, Thanjavur is null and void, declaring that the plaintiff is and continues to be a member of the Rotary Club of Thanjaur Mid Town, Thjanjavur and restraining the defendant from enforcing and or implementing the Resolution No.8 dated 21.1.2001 and for other incidental reliefs. The suit is being resisted by the defendant-Rotary Club of Thanjavur Mid Town, Thanjavur, represented by its 21 Board of Directors.

4. Pending the said suit, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.93 of 2001 praying for the relief of ad interim injunction from giving effect to and implementing its Resolution Nos.1 to 3, dated 1.4.2001 and from conducting the Board Meeting scheduled to be held on 4.5.2001. The said injunction application was resisted by the defendant by filing a detailed counter.

5. Subsequently, the very same plaintiff also instituted another suit in O.S.NO.192 of 2001 as against the same Rotary Club of Thanjavur Mid Town and 19 others seeking for a declaration that the Resolutions 1 to 3 dated 1.4.2001 passed by the Board of Directors of Rotary Club of Thanjavur Mid Town, Thanjavur is null and void and for permanent injunction as well. The earlier suit has a checkered career. Pending the earlier suit, the plaintiff again moved I.A.No.429 of 2001 seeking the relief of ad interim injunction from implementing the Resolutions 1 to 3 dated 1.4.2001.

After contest, the learned District Munsif of Thanjavur by order dated 18.7.2001 dismissed the injunction application. Once again the plaintiff filed a third suit O.S.NO.220 of 2002 seeking the relief of Declaration that the Resolution of the General Body of the defendant Rotary Club, dated 15.5.2002 terminating the membership in the defendant club is null and void and also sought for a declaration that the plaintiff continues to be a member of the defendant Club, besides seeking the relief of injunction forbearing the defendants from preventing the exercise of his rights as a member of defendant-club. All the suits are being resisted by the sole defendant.

7. Pending the third suit O.S.No.220 of 202, the plaintiff Chandrasekaran filed I.A.467 of 2002 to restrain the defendant-club from preventing him from exercising his right as a Member of the defendant club until disposal of the suit. The said application was resisted.

8. The learned District Munsif of Thanjavur by order dated 2nd December, 2003, dismissed the said application as no prima facie case has been made out. Being aggrieved, the very plaintiff preferred CMA.No.3 of 2003 on the file of the Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court) Thanjavur. The learned Additional Judge, by fair and decretal order dated 29th April 2003 set aside the order passed by the trial court, allowed the appeal and restrained the defendant from preventing the plaintiff-petitioner from exercising his right as a Member of the Club until the disposal of the suit. Challenging the same, the present revision has been preferred by the Defendant-Club.

9. Though a number of contentions were sought to be advanced by the revision petitioner, who is the defendant in the suit, the learned counsel rightly pointed out that the learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court) has proceeded on a misconception by framing the point in the said appeal for consideration as hereunder:-

"Whether the Appeal is allowed or not?"

10. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner also persuaded this court that though it is a revision preferred under Section 115 C.P.C., this c