ORDER :

(Prayer : Petition under Section 115 of C.P.C., to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 10.08.2004 made in E.A.No.37 of 2002 in E.P.No.258 of 1999 in OP.No.4 of 1994 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Udumalpet.)

1. Arulmighu Dhandayuthapani Thirukoil, Palani is the Petitioner herein, who is an Objector and third party before the Execution Court.

2. This Petition is filed to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 10.08.2004 made in E.A.No.37 of 2002 in E.P.No.258 of 1999 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Udumalpet.

3(a).The case of Petitioner is that the properties measuring to an extent of 50 cents in S.F.No.703/3D and an extent of 6 acres in S.F.No.706/2 in Mivadi Village, Udumalpet Taluk is absolutely belong to the Petitioner temple. The title of the temple was declared by the competent Civil Court and this Court also upheld the same. The 2nd respondent herein initiated proceedings before the Record Officer namely the Tahsildar, Udumalpet to register his name as cultivating tenant and the same was also ordered on 29.7.1997 in T.R.No.37 of 1993. In the above circumstances, by suppressing the title of the temple, the 1st respondent herein claiming himself as the owner of the property had executed a mortgage on 31.8.1988 in favour of the 2nd respondent herein for Rs.15,000/-. Subsequently to defeat the claim of the temple a petition for redemption of mortgage in O.P.No.4 of 94 before the District Munsif Court, Udumalpet was filed and the same was decreed on 13.10.1995.

3(b).The 2nd respondent herein filed an appeal questioning the order dated 13.10.1985 in C.M.A.No.57 of 95 and the same was also dismissed on 23.04.1996. In pursuant to the order dated 13.10.1985, for execution of the said order in E.P.No.258 of 1999 was filed. Immediately after knowing the said fact, the temple filed a petition under Section 47 of C.P.C. in E.A.No.37 of 2002 on 17.1.2002 and the same was dismissed on 10.8.2004 on the ground that the Petitioner temple was not a party to the proceedings in O.P.No.4 of 1994. Therefore Petition under Section 47 of C.P.C. was dismissed as not maintainable.

4. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner. Though Respondents' name printed in the cause list, none appeared. Despite opportunity, Respondents have not chosen to enter through Advocate. Perused the records.

5. The Joint Commissioner-cum-Executive Officer of the Arulmighu Dhandayuthapani Swamy Thirukoil, Palani, has preferred this Revision Petition against the dismissal of the Objector Petition filed under Section 47 of CPC.

6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that aggrieved by the said order dated 10.08.2004, the temple has filed the present C.R.P. The very object of Section 47 of C.P.C. is to prevent the parties from going before the Civil Court by way of yet another suit and the multiplicity of the proceedings. All disputes in respect of Execution should be decided in the same proceedings instead of dragging them to file separate suit. Hence, the Temple filed the present CRP to safeguard its property right.

7. The records filed in the typed set reveals the following facts.

i. On 19.08.1968, by order of the settlement Tahsildar – 1, Gobichettiypalayam, Ryotwari patta granted to KV Kolandaivelu & 5 of his sons under Section 8(2)(ii) & 21(3) of Act 30/1963 (Inam Abolition Act).

ii. On 03.07.1972, order passed in C.M.A.No.215 of 1970.

iii. On 11.09.1975, in STA.No.37 of 1973, this High Court ordered to issue patta in favour of Arulmighu Dhandayuthapani Swami Thirukoil, Palani.

iv. On 16.07.1990, order made in Civil Appeal No.920 of 1976, dismissing the Appeals and confirming the orders in favour of the deity.

8(a).While facts being so, records reveals that suppressing the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.920 of 1976, Respondents 1, 6 & 7, has filed OP.No.4 of 1994 for redemption of mortgage under Section 83 of Transfer of Property act, on the footing that they entered into an agreement of m