1. The present civil revision petition is filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs challenging the very filing of a petition by the respondents herein as third parties under Order 21 Rule 97 C.P.C. before the Executing Court seeking adjudication of their right, title and interest over the subject matter property.

2. Heard the learned counsels appearing on either side.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the very petition filed by the respondents herein before the Executing Court under Order 21 Rule 97 C.P.C. is not maintainable as they are only the vendors of the defendant in the suit in O.S.No.450 of 1983 filed by the petitioners. Thus, according to the learned counsel, the Court below ought not to have entertained the application under Order 21 Rule 97 by issuing notice to the petitioners. It is his further contention that as there is no similar provision as provided under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. for rejection of this petition he has chosen to file the present civil revision petition to challenge the very filing of the above application.

4. Per contra, the learned counsel Mr. Ravichandran appearing for the contesting respondent submitted that these respondents are having title to the property and what was conveyed to the defendant was only a part of the property and not its entirety.

5. Admittedly, an application is filed under Order 21 Rule 97 C.P.C. before the Executing Court by the respondents. According to the petitioners, the said application is not maintainable on the reason contend that the respondents are only the vendors of the defendants and therefore, they cannot be permitted to file an application under Order 21 Rule 97 C.P.C. Certainly, it is open to the petitioners to raise all their objections before the court below including the issue with regard to the maintainability of the application under Order 21 Rule 97 C.P.C. by filing their counter to the said application. As it is an application filed under Order 21 Rule 97 C.P.C., the Executing Court has to consider the same as similar to a suit and consider all the issues arising between the parties. Needless to say that such issues may include with regard to the maintainability of the application also. Therefore, it is open to the petitioners to raise all issues before the Executing Court and it is for the Court below to consider the same and pass orders in accordance with law based on the respective pleadings of the parties.

6. Therefore, in my considered view, the present civil revision petition is misconceived. As and when a counter is filed by the petitioners, the court below is directed to dispose of the E.A. within a period of three months from the date of filing of such counter. The civil revision petition is disposed of. No costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed.