ORDER :

Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of CPC, praying to set aside the fair order and decreetal order dated 01.11.2021 passed in N.T.A.No. 1 of 2021, by the learned Chief Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai, reversing the order dated 30.09.2021, passed in Distress Application No. 1 of 2020 by the learned Registrar, Small Causes Court, Chennai and dismiss NTA.No. 1 of 2021 by allowing D.A.No. 1 of 2020.

1. The Civil Revision Petition is filed by plaintiffs in a distress application, challenging the order passed by Chief Judge of Court of Small Cause, Chennai in new trial Appeal 1 of 2021 by setting aside the order passed by Registrar of the Small Causes Court, issuing distress warrant, in favour of petitioners against the movable of the respondent for the value of Rs.1,33,056/- towards arrears of rent from 01.09.2019 to 31.12.2019.

2. The petitioners herein filed distress application before the Registrar of the Small Causes Court, Chennai, claiming that the respondent was a tenant in respect of a non-residential building in the ground floor of premises bearing New Door No. 17, Old Door No. 5, Luz Church Road, Mylapore, Chennai-4 and he committed default in payment of agreed monthly rent of Rs.33,264/- per month from September 2019 to December 2019. Thus, the total arrears of rent was Rs.1,33,056/- towards arrears of rent for four months and they prayed for issue of distress warrant against the movables of the respondent described in the schedule to the petition.

3. The respondent herein filed a counter affidavit wherein it had averred that site of the building belonged to Sri Kabaleeswarar temple, Mylapore it was stated that the large extent of 24 grounds and 1288 sq.ft of land of which the building claimed by the petitioners was a portion, was let out by said temple to one Soundararaja Iyengar. The said lease period had expired on 05.01.1997. It was stated that the petitioners claimed right over a small portion of the said site namely 1600 sq.ft through one Soundararaja Iyengar. It was stated that the plaintiffs failed to renew the lease directly with the temple and consequently temple had initiated proceedings for eviction treating the petitioners and the respondent as trespassers. It was further submitted that in view of imminent threat of eviction by the paramount title holder namely the temple, the revision petitioners/plaintiffs have no right to sustain the distress application against the respondent. The distress application, having been filed by suppressing the above said material facts was not maintainable as there is a dispute with regard to the entitlement of the petitioners to claim rent. The Registrar of the Small Causes Court, Chennai, issued distress warrant as prayed for as against the movables of the respondent and aggrieved by the same, the respondent had filed new trial application in NTA.No. 1 of 2021, before the Chief Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai, under Section 38 of The Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, 1882 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Chief Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai, passed an order allowing the new trial application. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners/plaintiffs have come up before this Court.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that against the order passed issuing distress warrant in an application moved under Section 53 of the Act, remedy available to the aggrieved person is to invoke Section 60 of the said Act by filing an application before the Registrar, seeking discharge or suspension of the warrant or release of distrained articles. In the case on hand, invoking Section 60 of the Act, the respondent filed a new trial application under Section 36 r/w 38 of the said Act and the same is not at all maintainable. Secondly, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that even assuming the new trial application is maintainable, the said application has to be heard by a Bench of two Judges of the Small Causes Court and in the