Judgment : This civil revision petition is preferred against the order dated 10.01.2008 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Mettur in C.M.A.No.6 of 2007 confirming the order passed by the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Omalur in I.A.No.857 of 2003 in O.S.No.221 of 2003. Heard both sides. 2. The pith and marrow, the warp and woof of the relevant facts, which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this revision would run thus: The revision petitioners herein filed the suit in O.S.No.221 of 2003 seeking permanent injunction as against the defendants. They also filed I.A.No.857 of 2003 seeking interim injunction, but it was dismissed by the lower Court; as against which, CMA No.6 of 2007 was filed, which was also dismissed by the Appellate Court. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the orders of the both the courts below, the present civil revision petition has been focussed on various grounds among others. 3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioners, placing reliance on the grounds of revision, would submit that pending suit for declaration and injunction, if interim injunction is not granted, the plaintiffs would be prejudiced in prosecuting the matter. However, the learned counsel for the respondents would submit that both the courts below on appreciation of factual evidence and the circumstances of the case, dismissed the prayer for interim injunction and in such a case, this Court may not interfere with such finding of the fact. 4. A bare perusal of the orders of both the Courts below would exemplify and display that based on factual analysis, they thought fit not to grant ad interim injunction. I am of the considered opinion that no interference with the order of the both the Courts below is required as they were based on appreciation of factual circumstances involved in the case and no error in applying law has been brought to the notice of this Court, warranting interference. Accordingly, this civil revision petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 5. What transpired during argument is that now the suit is ripened for trial. Accordingly, this civil revision petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 5. What transpired during argument is that now the suit is ripened for trial. Hence, while dismissing this civil revision petition, I would like to direct the trial Court to dispose of the injunction suit, untrammelled and uninfluenced by the orders of both the Courts below and the observations of this Court in dismissing this revision, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.