1. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 20.03.2017 passed in I.A.No.247 of 2013 in O.S.No.1000 of 2012 on the file of the learned Principal Sub-Judge, Madurai, dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner under Order 1, Rule 10(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

2. The suit being O.S.No.1000 of 2012 has been filed by the first respondent, inter alia, seeking the following relief’s :

(a) Remove the defendant from the office of the Trustee of the Sri Thirugnana Sambanda Swamigal Math alias Madurai Aadheenam, Madurai and consequently remove him from the Hereditary Trusteeship of the Temples referred to in Para 18 of the plaint, which the defendant is holding by virtue of his office as Trustee of Sri Thirugnana Sambanda Swamigal Math alias Madurai Aadheenam, Madurai.

(b) To declare the deed of Trust (i.e.) “Madurai Aadheenam Trust” executed by the defendant vide Document No. 237/2012 dated 23.4.2012 Joint Sub Registrar- I, Madurai South and the affidavit appointing Sri Nithyananda as 293rd Aadheenakarthar of Madurai Aadheenam Math is null and void, and non-est in law.

(c) Mandatory injunction directing the defendant to hand over the Math and its properties to the plaintiff as contemplated under Section 60 of the Act so as to make arrangements for the administration of the Math and the endowments or of the specific endowments, as the case may be till another Trustee succeeds to the office as the case may be.

(d) Permanent injunction restraining the defendant or any one claiming through or nominated by him etc., to interfere with the Thirugnana Sambanda Swamigal Math and its properties.

(e) Directing the defendant to pay the costs of the suit.

3. Along with the suit, the first respondent filed I.A.No.966 of 2012 seeking ad-interim stay, staying the operation of the deed of declaration of the Trust Document No.237 of 2012, dated 23.04.2012 called Madurai Aadheenam Trust and the affidavit executed by the defendant dated 27.04.2012 till the disposal of the suit.

4. By an order dated 26.02.2013, the Principal Sub Judge, Madurai had granted stay of operation of the deed of trust dated 23.04.2012 and the affidavit dated 27.04.2012 till the disposal of the suit.

5. Pending suit, the petitioner filed I.A.No.247 of 2013 seeking to implead him as defendant in the suit alleging that the second respondent, after verifying the facts and being fully satisfied that the petitioner was very efficient and spiritually evolved person and also due to his old age, had appointed the petitioner as his successor, the 293rd pontiff of Madurai Aatheenam on 27.04.2012. Prior to the official coronation, the second respondent had solemnized the petitioner with Visheda Deeksha, Manthra Kaashayam, Nirvana Deeksha and Acharaya Abishekam. Pursuant to the appointment, the petitioner has started performing all the religious and spiritual duties attached under the guidance of the first respondent and had also started Annadhanam.

6. Questioning the appointment of the petitioner as 293rd pontiff of Madurai Aadheenam, several writ petitions were filed. By an order dated 10.05.2012, the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court dismissed the writ petition being filed in W.P.(MD)No.6670 of 2012. It is alleged that the suit in O.S.No.1000 of 2012 is hit by non-joinder of the petitioner as party defendant. In the trust deed, it has been stated that the petitioner and the second respondent were the life trustees and therefore, the first respondent ought to have impleaded the petitioner as party defendant in the suit. According to the petitioner, he is not only a necessary party, but also interested party.

7. Resisting the petition, the first respondent filed counter stating that the second respondent filed O.S.No.1038 of 2012 against the petitioner for declaration that the deed of declaration of trust executed on 12.04.2012 as invalid, ineffective, null and void. It is stated that the petitioner has filed O.S.No.85 of 2013 against the second resp