Scope and applicability of the provisions of Section 29.

V. Ratnam, J.

1. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dismissing an application filed by the petitioner under Order 21, rub, 29, Code of Civil Procedure, praying for a stay of operation of the decree in O.S. No. 323 of 1970, District Munsif's Court, Periyakulam and all further execution proceedings therein till the final disposal of O.S. No. 85 of 1978, District Munsif's Court, Periyakulam. The property in question is an extent of 1 acre and 89 cents in survey No 2281, Thamaraikulatn Village, Periyakulam taluk, Madurai District. One M. C. Gurusamy Reddiar founded in Krishnapuram village a Vinayakar Temple called ''Nalam Tharum Vinayakar Temple" and dedicated the property referred to earlier 10 the temple under the terms of a deed of settlement dated 14th June, 1945. He was also functioning as the trustee of the temple. On 20th March, 1968, by a document styled as a deed of transfer of trust, M. G. Gurusamy Reddiar purported to transfer the office of the trustee to one M. A. Krihnasamy Reddiar, the father of the respondent herein. The father of the petitioner having purchased the property referred to above, set up his title as against the Vinyakar temple which led to the institution of a suit in O.S. No, 323 of 1970, District Munsif's Court, Periyakulam, for recovery of possession of the property, by M.A. Krishnasamy Reddiar. During the pendency of that suit, M. A. Krishnasamy Reddiar died and the respondent herein got another document dated 9th December, 1970 from M. G. Gurusamy Reddiar transferring the trusteeship and prosecuted the suit institued by his father M. A. Krisnasamy Reddiar. On 22nd July, 1971, the suit was dismissed and on appeal by the respondent herein in A. S. No. 205 of 1971, Sub-Court, Dindigul, a decree for recovery of possession of the property was granted in favour of the respondent herein. The father of the petitioner who figured as the defendant in the suit preferred a Second Appeal in S. A. No. 2334 of 1974 to this Court and during the pendency of that appeal he died and his legal representatives including the petitioner herein were brought on record and on 6th August, 1975 the second appeal was dismissed confirming the decree of the lower Appellate Court. As against that, the petitioner and others preferred an application for Special Leave to the Supreme Court of India in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 718 of 1976 and that was also dismissed on 12th January, 1978. It is the decree in O.S. No. 323 of 1970 as confirmed by this Court as well as the Supreme Court that is about to be executed by the respondent. Meanwhile, after the dismissal of the Special Leave Petition by the Supreme Court on 12th January, 1978 the petitioner and his brother purported to obtain a document styled as trust devolution deed in their favour from the original founder M. G. Gurusamy Reddiar and his son G. Mani under which the petitioner and his brother claimed to have become trustees and that, therefore, they are entitled to be in possession of the property of the temple as trustees. The petitioner and his brother further claimed that M. G. Gurusamy Reddiar and his son G. Mani are competent to execute the trust devolution deed with a view to provide for the succession of trustees for the administration of the temple. Thus claiming that they have become trustees, the petitioner and his brother instituted O.S. No. 85 of 1978, District Munsif's Court, Periyakulam against the respondent herein and M. G. Gurusamy Reddiar and his son G. Mani impleading them as defendants 1 to 3. In the course of the plaint in that suit, the petitioner and his brother have alleged that the document executed by M, G. Gurusamy Reddiar on 20th March, 1968 in favour of M.A. Krishnasamy Reddiar and the document dated 9th December, 1970, purporting to be a transfer of trusteeship by M. G. Gurusamy Reddiar in favour of the respondent herein are documents which are invalid and therefore, the temple was not properly represented in