1. Since the issues involved in all these Civil Revision Petitions are one and the same, they are disposed of by way of a common order.

2. As far as CRP (MD)No.324 of 2011 is concerned, it is filed seeking to set aside the fair and decreetal order passed by the Principal Sub Court, Kumbakonam dated on 30.09.2010 in I.A.No.59 of 2006 in O.S.No.199 of 2002.

3. The factual matrix to be considered for the purpose of deciding the Civil Revision Petition are that the entire dispute between the parties to the lis emanated from and out of the scheme suit filed in O.S.No.199 of 2002, dated 28.01.2003. The public trust was constituted through a trust deed dated 01.10.1887 The public trust was functioning for the past 130 years and the great souls, who constituted the trust had certain visions and accordingly contributed their valuable properties during the relevant point of time. The disputes now arose between the legal heirs and the trustees are certainly painful. The trustees and some others are committing a sin towards the great souls, who constituted the trust with great ideas and ambitions. It is the duties and responsibilities of the trustees and legal heirs to ensure that the soul and spirit of those persons, who constituted the trust are respected and the deed is implemented in its real spirit. After all, out of greediness and out of selfishness the parties to the lis are creating disputes in respect of the properties belonging to the public trust, which was constituted, more specifically, in the year 1887.

4. Let us now consider the issues involved in the present civil revision petition. The scheme suit was filed in O.S.No.199 of 2002 on the file of the Sub Court, Kumbakonam. The list of documents and description of properties are set out in the scheme suit and the description of properties for the purpose of better appreciation is extracted here under :-

Thanjavur District, Kumbakonam registry, Kumbakonam Town Taluk, 114, Ullur Vattam, Ullur Village, Minicipal Limits.

S l. No	Ward	T.S. No	Extent
01	I	Survey 33/1 Nanjai	1 Ac.30889 Sq.Ft
02	I	Survey 33/2 Nanjai	0 Ac.11504 Sq.Ft
03	I	Survey 33/63 Nanjai	0 Ac 13504Sq.Ft
04	I	Survey 38/0 Nanjai	0 Ac 18553 Sq.Ft
05	I	Survey 45/0 Nanjai	0 Ac 6876 S1.Ft.

1 to 5 lands are acquired under Land Ceiling Act, Hence, the prayer for permission is prayed for 1 to 5 lands.

Sl. No	Ward	T.S.No	Extent
06	I	Survey 47 Nanjai	0 Ac.13632 Sq.Ft
07	I	Survey 137 Nanjai	1 Ac.21425 Sq.Ft
08	6	Survey 147 Nanjai	6 Ac.3945 Sq.Ft
09	6	Survey 753 Nanjai	0 Ac. 32 Sq.Ft
10	6	Survey 753 Nanjai	0 Ac.733 Sq.Ft

      

11	6	Survey 754 Nanjai	0 Ac.7051 Sq.Ft
12	6	Survey 754 Nanjai	0 Ac.34737 Sq.Ft
13	6	Survey 759 Nanjai	0 Ac.23400 Sq.Ft
14	6	Survey 765 Nanjai	0 Ac.17031 Sq.Ft
15	6	Survey 766 Nanjai	0 Ac.16582 Sq.Ft
16	6	Survey 769 Nanjai	0 Ac.3687 Sq.Ft

5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the revision petitioners made submissions that Interlocutory Application filed by the Trust is not maintainable. In order to substantiate his contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that a portion of the property was already alienated through the deed of exchange in the year 1970, in favour of one Smt. Lakshmi Ammal, wife of A.Ramasamy alias Rama Iyer (one of the Trustees). Thus, the property, which was handed over to the said Lakshmi Ammal by way of exchange deed in the year 1970, cannot be taken away by the trust by filing an Interlocutory Application, in the scheme suit, filed in O.S.No.199 of 2002. Further, the contention of the petitioners is that the said Lakshmi Ammal is to be treated as a third party for all purposes. More over, in respect of the property in dispute, she was not a trustee nor connected with the public trust. This being the factum, the transaction