Inveighing the order dated 9.4.2008 passed in I.A.No.267 of 2007 in O.S.No.49 of 2007 by the Sub Court, Bghavani., this civil revision petition is focussed.
2. The epitome of the relevant facts, which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this civil revision petition, would run thus:-
The revision petitioners/plaintiffs filed the suit O.S.No.49 of 2007 before the Sub Court, Bhavani, seeking the following relief:
" to declare that the plaintiffs are the absolute owners of the suit property and consequential permanent injunction by restraining defendants their men and agent from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property."
The plaintiffs also filed I.A.No.267 of 2007 seeking interim injunction and the same is pending. But the present revision has been filed so as to give direction to the lower Court to dispose of the I.A.267 of 2007 at an early date.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners/plaintiffs would entreat and implore that the purpose of revision petition itself is to give direction to the lower Court to take up the I.A.No.267 of 2007 and necessary directions might be issued.
4. Whereas the learned counsel for the respondents would highlight and spotlight certain facts to the effect that already one other suit was filed by R1 as against R2 herein for recovery of money and in that suit, an I.A. was filed for attachment before judgement and the same was ordered relating to the same suit property in the present O.S.No.49 of 2007. Subsequently, a money decree was passed in the previous suit and the present suit property in O.S.No.49 of 2007 was brought for Court auction sale and it was purchased by the 3rd respondent herein. While so, the revision petitioners/plaintiffs filed this fresh suit, viz., O.S.No.49 of 2007 without any rhyme or reason.
5. Be that as it may. At present this revision petition is only for the purpose of issuing direction to the lower Court to dispose of the I.A.No.267 of 2007, which is for injunction. However, I fully realise the ramification and implication in issuing direction by this Court in exercising of the power under
Article 227 of the Constitution because at times the lower Court might misunderstand and get themselves obfuscated and perplexed. Hence, I would make it clear that it is the duty of the lower Court to dispose of the I.A.267 of 2007 as expeditiously as possible and in the meantime, it is open for the R3 herein to persuade the lower Court to consider the maintainability of the suit itself, in view of the submission made before me, and in such an event, it is at the discretion of the lower Court either to take I.A .along with the said objection or independently as the facts and circumstances might deem fit and proper.
6. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Msk To The Sub Court, Bghavani