Abdul Quddhose, J.

(Prayer: Original side Appeal filed under Order XXXVI Rule 9 of Original Side Rules, 1956 Read with Clause 15 of the Amended Letters Patent, 1865 to set aside the Order and decree dated 25.04.2018 passed in Application No.6533 of 2017 in C.S.D.36131 of 2017 passed by this Court by allowing the Original Side Appeal with costs.)

This Intra Court appeal has been filed under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent, aggrieved by the order dated 25.04.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in Application No.6533 of 2017 in C.S.D.36131 of 2017.

Brief facts leading to the filing of the instant appeal :

2. The Appellants are the first and third defendants in the proposed suit filed by the respondents 1 to 4 against the appellants as well as the fifth respondent in this appeal under Section 92 CPC seeking for removal of the first appellant/first defendant as life trustee in the first respondent/first plaintiff trust as well as for permanent injunction restraining the defendants in the proposed suit not to interfere with the respondents 2 to 4 in the management of the first respondent/first plaintiff trust. Application No.6533 of 2017 was filed by the respondents 1 to 4/plaintiffs in the proposed suit seeking the grant of leave to file the suit against the defendants under Section 92 CPC. Leave was sought on the ground that the first appellant/first defendant has committed breach of first respondent/first plaintiff trust and that, he is not competent to be appointed as life trustee or as any other trustee in the first respondent/first plaintiff trust.

3. The respondents 2 to 4 have also stated in their affidavit filed in support of Application No.6533 of 2017 that they are interested persons in the first respondent/first plaintiff trust as they belong to Vupputur family who were given majority control in the first respondent/first plaintiff trust by the founder of the trust, Vupputur Alwar Chetty, under the Trust Deed dated 28.08.1922.

4. A counter affidavit was also filed by the Appellants who are the defendants 1 and 3 in Application No.6533 of 2017 stating that the respondents 2 to 4 are not interested persons in the first respondent/first plaintiff trust and only to ventilate their personal grievances against the appellants, the suit under Section 92 CPC has been filed by them. It is also their case that the respondents 2 to 4 are no longer trustees of the first respondent/first plaintiff Trust. It is also averred in the counter affidavit that for the same cause of action, earlier suits have been filed by the respective respondents to ventilate their personal grievances which are still pending and hence, the proposed suit filed under Section 92 CPC by the respondents 1 to 4 is not maintainable as respondents 2 to 4 do not satisfy the requirements of Section 92 CPC as they are not interested persons. By order dated 25.04.2018, the learned Single Judge of this Court, allowed Application No.6533 of 2017 filed by the respondents 1 to 4/plaintiffs granting leave to file the suit under Section 92 CPC. Aggrieved by the order dated 25.04.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Application No.6533 of 2017, the instant appeal has been filed.

Submissions of the learned Counsels:

5. Heard Mr.V.Lakshmi Narayanan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.R.Singgaravelan learned Senior Counsel for the respondents 1 to 4 and Mr.B.R.Sankaralingam, learned counsel for the fifth respondent.

6. The learned counsel for the Appellants would submit that the respondents 1 to 4/plaintiffs have not approached the court with clean hands and lack bonafides to file the suit under Section 92 CPC.

7. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the Appellants that prior to filing the leave Application under Section 92 CPC, the family members of the respondents 1 to 4/plaintiffs as well as the respondents/plaintiffs have filed sui