ORDER : In both the writ petitions, the petitioner is one and the same and the respondents in WP.No.25942/2003 are also the respondents in the other writ petition apart from the other respondents and the subject matter of the issue in both the writ petitions is one and the same and therefore, with the consent of both sides, both these writ petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The prayer sought for by the petitioner Association in WP.No.25942/2003 is for a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 10.09.2003, with a further prayer to direct the respondents 4 and 5 to protect the enjoyment of the petitioner premises at Door No.126, Cinema Nagar, Salem-9, pursuant to the complaint given on behalf of the petitioner to the 4th respondent on 14.09.2003. The prayer sought for by the petitioner Association in WP.No.29529/2003 is for a writ of certiorari, to quash the order passed by the District Registrar, Salem dated 12.09.2003. 3. The facts which are required to be noted for the disposal of these two writ petitions are as follows:- [a] The petitioner in both the writ petitions is a Film Distributor Council at Salem which is a registered Association under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 [hereinafter referred to as the Act ]. Likewise, yet another Association which is also dealing with the Film Distribution in that area is called as Salem, Dharmapuri, Namakkal Districts Film Distribution Association, Salem . This Association, for the sake of brevity, will be called as the old Association or ''dissolved Association. [b] Since the main aim, object and functions of both the Associations are related to Film Distribution in the District of Salem and nearby Districts, some of the Members of the Petitioner Association could have been the Members of the old/dissolved Association and some of the Members of the Old/dissolved Association could have been the Members of the Petitioner Association. [c] While that being so, the old/dissolved Association had a Special General Body Meeting on 16.05.1998, where they have unanimously passed some Resolutions out of which, Resolutions No.3, 4, 5 and 6 are relevant for the purpose of these writ petitions. [c] While that being so, the old/dissolved Association had a Special General Body Meeting on 16.05.1998, where they have unanimously passed some Resolutions out of which, Resolutions No.3, 4, 5 and 6 are relevant for the purpose of these writ petitions. Hence, they are reproduced hereunder:- xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [d] Pursuant to the aforesaid Resolutions passed unanimously by the old/dissolved Association, the same had been communicated to the petitioner/Association by Letter dated 16.07.1998 which reads thus:- xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx For the Salem Dharmapuri & Rajaji Districts Film Distributor's Association President [e] In response to the said Resolution having been forwarded to the Petitioner Association by the old/dissolved Association, the Petitioner Association has sent the following communication to the District Registrar, Salem, on 17.08.1998, which reads thus:- xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx For the Salem Cini Film Distributors Council. President [f]Thereafter, it seems that, the District Registrar, Salem [1st respondent in WP.No.29259/2003 and 2nd respondent in WP.No.25942/2003 hereinafter referred to as the District Registrar, Salem] had sought for some clarification from the Inspector General of Registration, who is the 1st respondent in WP.No.25942/2003, with regard to the follow up action to be taken in this regard. In response to the said queries raised by the District Registrar, Salem, the Inspector General of Registration has sent a communication dated 26.05.2003, directing the District Registrar, Salem to execute the Resolutions passed by the old/dissolved Association on 16.05.1998 and the relevant portion of the said communication of the Inspector General of Registration dated 26.05.2003 reads thus:- xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [g] In the meanwhile, on 07.03.2003, a direction was issued by the Inspector General of Registration to the District Registrar, Salem, that both the Associations can have an unanimous Resolution or Resolution by majority towards the amalgamation of these Associations under the provisions of the Act. Also, on 26.05.2003, it seems that an order had been passed by the District Registrar, Salem, against the interest of the petitioner Association which was communicated on 29.05.2003 which was challenged before this Court in WP.No.15095/2003. Also, on 26.05.2003, it seems that an order had been passed by the District Registrar, Salem, against the interest of the petitioner Association which was communicated on 29.05.2003 which was challenged before this Court in WP.No.15095/2003. [h] In the said writ petition, the erstwhile Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, one Rajamanickam, who is the 2nd respondent in WP.No.29259/2003/3rd respondent in WP.No.25942/2003 hereinafter referred to as the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association], was also a party and on his behalf, the learned counsel appeared for him, had made a statement before this Court that his client would take steps for revival of the Association and would take appropriate steps for getting back its properties. The said statement made on behalf of the Secretary through his Counsel, was recorded by this Court and the said writ petition was dismissed in the following terms:- Though very many contentions were advanced, it is not necessary to examine the merits of those contentions as Mr.K.Selvaraj, learned counsel appearing for the third respondent represents that the erstwhile Associations viz., Salem, Dharmapuri and Namakkal Districts Film Distributors Association will be taking steps for revival of that Association and also take appropriate steps for getting back its property. The said statement of Mr.K.Selvaraj, learned counsel for the third respondent is recorded. In the light of the said stand taken by the third respondent, nothing survives in this writ petition. Hence the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently connected W.P.M.P and W.V.M.P are dismissed. since the third respondent has taken such a stand, the implementation of the order impugned will not arise. [I] It seems that, pursuant to the recording of the statement of the Secretary in the said writ petition, as extracted above, he seems to have made a request on 08.09.2003 to the District Registrar, Salem seeking to revive the old/dissolved Association. On receipt of such request from the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, the District Registrar, Salem has passed an order on 10.09.2003, wherein the District Registrar, Salem has made the following order:- xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [j] Consequently, the very same District Registrar, Salem passed yet another order on 12.09.2003, to the following effect:- xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [k] The order of the District Registrar, Salem dated 10.09.2003, is under challenge in WP.No.25942/2003 and his subsequent order dated 12.09.2003 is under challenge in WP.No.29259/2003. That is how both these writ petitions have been filed before this Court with the aforesaid prayers. 4. Mr.K.Doraisami, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.Kandan Doraisami, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner Association in both the writ petitions, made the following submissions:- [a] Both the petitioner Association and the old/dissolved Association had been functioning with similar object related to film distribution in the same area. Of late, many Members of the old Association had been the Members of the Petitioner Association and therefore, the old/dissolved Association decided unanimously to dissolve the said Association and in that effect, they had a Special General Meeting and passed an Unanimous Resolution on 16.05.1998. Among various resolutions, Resolution No.3, specifically resolved unanimously to dissolve the Association and Resolution No.4 speaks about the entrustment of the properties towards petitioner Association and the Resolution No.6 specifically states that as per the Resolution, the Association has been dissolved at once. [b] The learned Senior counsel would further submit that pursuant to the Resolutions having been unanimously adopted in the Special General Body Meeting of the said Association, the same had been forwarded to the District Registrar, Salem, and also it had been communicated to the Petitioner Association by the said old Association on 16.07.1998. [c] Pursuant to the aforesaid actions, the petitioner Association also had sent a communication along with the copy of the Resolution passed in the Petitioner Association to the District Registrar, Salem, stating that the petitioner Association has resolved to accept the offer made and the Resolution passed and sent to the petitioner Association by the erstwhile/old Association and accordingly, they agreed to take the properties belonging to the erstwhile/old Association and to act upon their Resolution. [d] Even though these legal formalities had been taken place for the Dissolution of the erstwhile/old Association and also to hand over the properties to the Petitioner Association and the same had also been forwarded/communicated by both Associations to the District Registrar, Salem, the said official, viz., the District Registrar, Salem, had to pass a formal approval of such decision taken by the Associations which would have given a quietus to the issue. [e] In stead, the District Registrar, Salem, seems to have sought for certain clarification from the Inspector General of Registration, who in turn, by communication dated 26.05.2003, directed the District Registrar, Salem, to act upon as per the Resolution dated 16.05.1998 for execution of the same. [f] When that being the position, since the District Registrar, Salem passed some adverse order against the interest of the Petitioner Association, which made the petitioner Association to approach this Court to file WP.No.15095/2003. In that writ petition, the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, who was the 3rd respondent therein, through his Counsel, had made a submission that, he would take steps for revival of the Association and also to take appropriate steps for getting back its properties. Only the said statement made on his behalf by the learned counsel, had been recorded by the learned Judge in the said order and therefore, the same cannot be construed that the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association has got a liberty to get an automatic revival of the old/dissolved Association. [g] The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner Association would also make a submission that, in fact the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, pursuant to the unanimous Resolution passed on 16.05.1998, which had been acted upon by all the Members of the Association by sending copy of the Resolution to the District Registrar, Salem for Approval, had approached this Court and filed a Civil Suit in OS.No.4/2000 wherein, he had sought for a Declaratory Decree and consequential Prohibitory Order, seeking declaration of the Resolution of the old/dissolved Association dated 16.05.1998, as null and void and also sought for consequential permanent injunction, restraining the Petitioner Association from interfering with the properties of the old/dissolved Association. [h] The said suit, was contested and after having examined the witnesses, the Civil Court, had dismissed the said suit on 01.11.2001. [h] The said suit, was contested and after having examined the witnesses, the Civil Court, had dismissed the said suit on 01.11.2001. In this regard, the learned Senior counsel has drawn the attention of this Court about the findings given by the Civil Court in the said suit filed by the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, which are extracted hereunder for easy reference:- xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [i] Since the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association having failed in his attempt in approaching the Civil Court to establish that the said Resolution dated 16.05.1998 passed unanimously by the old/dissolved Association as null and void, he also filed yet another suit in OS.No.3/2002 and in the said suit, he has sought for a prayer of declaration that the Members of the old/dissolved Association deemed to be the Members of the 1st respondent/Council, i.e., the petitioner Association herein and also for some other consequential reliefs. The said suit also came to be dismissed as withdrawn by the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, who was the plaintiff therein, with cost. [j] Therefore, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner Association would submit that, in two attempts made by the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, in approaching the Civil Court, he failed and his both suits had been dismissed, one is on merit and another one by his own withdrawal, of course, with cost. Hence, the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association herein, against the unanimous Resolution passed by the old/dissolved Association for dissolving the said Association and handing over the properties to the petitioner Association, cannot re-agitate the issue in any other manner which is impermissible in law. [k] He would also submit that, once an Association/a Society registered under the Act, is dissolved, pursuant to the Special Resolution passed in this regard, such dissolution would take effect forthwith or from the date mentioned in the Resolution. Here, in the case on hand, such a Resolution was passed on 16.05.1998 and it was given effect to forthwith, i.e., from the date of Resolution itself. Therefore, the said Association has been dissolved within the meaning of Section 41 of the Act and the same cannot be revived by any means as there is no such provision available under the Act. Therefore, the said Association has been dissolved within the meaning of Section 41 of the Act and the same cannot be revived by any means as there is no such provision available under the Act. Once the Association / Society got dissolved, after settling the dues to the Members and other Creditors, the remaining or residual properties and assets, shall not be given or disbursed to the Members of the dissolved Association/Society. However, it shall be given to some other registered Society/Association with similar object. Therefore, once the Association/Society got dissolved, the properties shall not be devolved or distributed among the Members of the dissolved Association/Society and it should go to a similarly placed Society/Association with similar objects and functions. Hence, the Petitioner Association which is already functioning with similar objects, has been accepted by the dissolved Association/Society that the Petitioner Association is functioning with the similar object. Hence, the properties entrusted to the Petitioner Association, is completely in tune with Section 42 of the Act and therefore, it cannot be found fault with. [l] The learned Senior Counsel would also submit that, when that being the position, all of a sudden, based on an alleged letter given by the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, the District Registrar, Salem has passed the impugned orders on 10.09.2003 and 12.09.2003 respectively, thereby in the first order, the dissolved Association/Society has been given revival automatically and pursuant to which, the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association has been permitted to have police assistance to retrieve the properties which have already been entrusted to the Petitioner Association. Both the impugned orders, according to the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, passed by the District Registrar, Salem, is without taking into account the provisions of the Act and also the factual matrix of the case and therefore, both the impugned orders are liable to be interfered with by this Court. 4. Per contra, Mr.L.Chandrakumar, learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent in WP.No.25942/2003/2nd respondent in WP.No.29259/2003, who claim to be the erstwhile Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, would submit that, no doubt the Resolution was passed on 16.05.1998 and the same had been communicated to the Petitioner Association as well as the District Registrar, Salem. 4. Per contra, Mr.L.Chandrakumar, learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent in WP.No.25942/2003/2nd respondent in WP.No.29259/2003, who claim to be the erstwhile Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, would submit that, no doubt the Resolution was passed on 16.05.1998 and the same had been communicated to the Petitioner Association as well as the District Registrar, Salem. However, subsequently, majority of the Members of the old/dissolved Association Association, thought fit to revive the Association and to retrieve back the properties belonging to the old/dissolved Association which has been entrusted to the Petitioner Association and therefore, in order to revive the Association, the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association had approached the Civil Court, where the Civil Court, without properly appreciating the issue in proper perspective, had dismissed the suit filed by the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association. Subsequently, since the Inspector General of Registration on 07.03.2003, sent a communication, directing both the Associations to have a Special General Body Meeting and to have a special resolution to that effect for amalgamation of both the Associations, which was the only course of action permissible under the provisions of the Act, so that both the Members of the Associations can have the benefit of being the Members of the amalgamated Association and can continue to have the fruits of the Association functioning ; but the said order has not been acted upon. Hence, the subsequent orders passed by the District Registrar, Salem, in tune with the said directions and orders passed by the Inspector General of Registration, has been put under challenge by the Petitioner Association in the writ petition filed by them in the first round. 4.a The learned counsel would also submit that when the writ petition, i.e., WP/No.15095/2003 was taken up for hearing, a stand was taken by the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association that he would be taking necessary steps for revival of the old/dissolved Association and also to take appropriate steps to get back the properties of the said Association. The said stand taken by the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association for the future course of action, was recorded by the learned Judge in the said writ petition and only pursuant to such stand taken by the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, the writ petition was dismissed stating that there could be no reason to implement the order impugned in the said writ petition. 4.c It is the further submission of the learned counsel appearing for the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association that, pursuant to the said order of dismissal of WP.No.15095/2003 by this Court, where the stand of the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association was recorded, which gives rise to the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association to take necessary steps to revive the old/dissolved Association and that is the reason why the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association also had given a representation to the District Registrar, Salem and also approached this Court by filing a separate writ petition in WP.No.9109/2003, seeking for a mandamus to direct the District Registrar, Salem to consider the said representation and in the said writ petition, an order was passed by this Court dated 25.03.2003, directing the official respondents to consider the said representation of the petitioner therein dated 11.03.2003 in accordance with law. 4.d The learned counsel would further submit that by taking into account the overall proceedings including various orders passed by this Court, the District Registrar, Salem has passed an order on 10.09.2003 permitting the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association to revive the old/dissolved Association. Even though the said order was passed for revival of the dissolved Association, the properties which was entrusted to the petitioner Association could not be retrieved back and in order to retrieve the same, it became necessary for the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association to get police assistance and the said request was also permitted by the District Registrar, Salem by passing the consequential order on 12.09.2003. Therefore, both the orders passed by the District Registrar, Salem on 10.09.2003 and 12.09.2003 respectively, were within the four corners of legal sanctity and also within the jurisdiction and power vest with the District Registrar, Salem and the same cannot be assailed by the petitioner Association. Therefore, both the orders passed by the District Registrar, Salem on 10.09.2003 and 12.09.2003 respectively, were within the four corners of legal sanctity and also within the jurisdiction and power vest with the District Registrar, Salem and the same cannot be assailed by the petitioner Association. 4.e He would also submit that, since the resolution passed as claimed to have been unanimously passed on 16.05.1998, is not a resolution with true spirit of the intention of all the Members of the old/dissolved Association, The Members have got every right to revive the dissolved Association and unless an approval is given for dissolution by the District Registrar, Salem, the same can at any time be revived and therefore, there is no gain saying that, by merely taking into account the request of the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, the District Registrar, Salem ought not to have passed an automatic revival order, reviving the old/dissolved Association. Hence, it is the submission of the learned counsel for the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association that, both the impugned orders are not only justifiable but also sustainable and the said orders do not require any interference at the hands of this Court. 5. Mr.P.P.Purushothaman, learned Government Advocate appearing for the officials respondents, by relying upon the averments made in the counter affidavit would submit that, WP.No.15095/2003 filed by the Petitioner Association was disposed of on 22.08.2003 and the stand taken by the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association therein was recorded by the learned Judge and while recording the same, if at all the petitioner had got any grievance, he would have agitated the same ; but the petitioner Association was silent in dismissing the writ petition filed by it and therefore, the finding of recording the stand taken by the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association in the said writ petition has become final. 5.a It is his further submission that, since the language used in the order passed by this Court dated 22.08.2003, stating that the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association would be taking steps for revival of the old/dissolved Association and also would take appropriate steps for getting back its properties and once the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association filed an application pursuant to the said observation made by this Court in the said order, the District Registrar, Salem taking into account the said orders passed by this Court, has passed an order dated 10.09.2003 for revival of the old/dissolved Association. On 12.09.2003, he had passed consequential order, enabling the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association to get police assistance for retrieval of the properties. 5.c The learned Government Advocate would further submit that, u/s.42 of the Act, the assets of a Dissolved Society shall be given to a similarly placed Society. However, there is no such Gift Deed has been executed by the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association and therefore, in the absence of any Gift Deed executed by the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, in favour of the Petitioner Association duly registered, the ownership of the properties of the old/dissolved Association still vest only with the said Association and therefore, based on which, the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association can seek for retrieval. 5.d The learned Government Advocate would also submit that, however, subsequently, in view of the interim order passed by this Court in these writ petitions, the District Registrar, Salem passed an order on 09.01.2004, making an interim arrangement that till final decision, the properties already been entrusted to the petitioner Association, can be administered by the Petitioner Association itself. The relevant portion of the order of the District Registrar, Salem dated 09.01.2004 is extracted hereunder for easy reference:- xxxxxxxxxxxxx 5.e Therefore, the learned Government Advocate would submit that, all the orders passed by the District Registrar, Salem, i.e., the impugned orders dated 10.09.2003 and 12.09.2003 as well as the subsequent order dated 09.01.2004, are pursuant to the orders passed by this Court and in this regard, the District Registrar, Salem cannot be found fault with and the said orders can very well be sustained and prays for dismissal of the writ petitions. 6. 6. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner Association ; learned Government Advocate appearing for the official respondents and the learned counsel appearing for the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association. 7. It is an admitted fact that, there had been two Associations, both registered under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. Both Associations are involved in similar activities relating to Film Distribution, that too, in the same area. It is the fact that, on 16.05.1998, a Special General Body Meeting of the old/dissolved Association had taken place where, among other things, three important resolutions have been passed. Resolution No.3 makes it abundantly clear that the Association has unanimously resolved to dissolve the Association. Resolution No.4 specifically says that the properties, both movable and immovable, shall be entrusted to the Petitioner Association. Resolution No.6 very categorically states that as per the unanimous resolution of the Association, the Association was dissolved on that day itself. 8. Subsequently, a copy of the Resolution had been sent to the District Registrar, Salem as well as to the Petitioner Association, pursuant to which, the petitioner Association also on 10.08.1998, had an Extraordinary General Body Meeting where resolutions have been passed and the resolution sent by the old/dissolved Association had been accepted and accordingly, the petitioner Association sent a communication to the District Registrar, Salem that they have accepted the Resolution passed by the old/dissolved Association and they are ready and willing to accept the properties. 9. Though such a resolution had been passed and it has been acted upon by both Associations, the only activity which was to be followed was only the formal approval to be given by the District Registrar, Salem. However, the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, who claims to be the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, had filed a suit in OS.No.4/2000 on the file of the District Court, Salem. The said suit, on merits, was dismissed on 01.11.2001. However, the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, who claims to be the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, had filed a suit in OS.No.4/2000 on the file of the District Court, Salem. The said suit, on merits, was dismissed on 01.11.2001. The reasoning given by the learned Judge for dismissal has already been extracted above and the learned Judge has given a categorical finding that after having agreed and signed on behalf of the old/dissolved Association to entrust the properties to the Petitioner Association, the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association who was the plaintiff therein, had now turned around and stated that the Petitioner Association was trying to sell the properties. It has also been observed by the Civil Court that, the Resolution dated 16.05.1998 has already been given effect to two years back and only thereafter, the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association had filed the said suit. By giving the above reasonings, the said suit came to be dismissed. 10. Not stopping with that, the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association filed yet another suit in OS.NO.3/2002 before the Court of District Judge, Salem, and the said suit was also dismissed as withdrawn, of course, with cost. Therefore, on two occasions, the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association who is the contesting respondent herein, had approached the Civil Court and in one of the civil suits, his plea had been rejected on merits. If at all the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association had any grievance over the said dismissal of the suit by the Civil Court, he could have very well agitated the issue by preferring an appeal before the Appellate Court. Since he has not chosen to file any appeal against the dismissal of the suit on merits, i.e., OS.No.4/2000, the judgment and decree passed in that regard, has become final against which, no findings can be given by any authority, much less the District Registrar, Salem. 11. Be that as it may, the Inspector General of Registration vide proceedings dated 03.04.2003, has passed an order directing the District Registrar, Salem to act upon as per the Resolution dated 16.05.1998 and in this regard, the plea raised by the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association has been rejected. The relevant portion of the said order of the Inspector General of Registration dated 03.04.2003, is extracted hereunder:- xxxxxxxxxxxxx 12. The relevant portion of the said order of the Inspector General of Registration dated 03.04.2003, is extracted hereunder:- xxxxxxxxxxxxx 12. These documents would go to show that, it is not only the Resolution of the old/dissolved Association dated 16.05.1998 was passed ; but also the subsequent two civil suits filed by the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association had been dismissed and also the Inspector General of Registration, vide proceedings dated 03.04.2003, has categorically stated that the Resolution dated 16.05.1998 had been accepted and accordingly, the concerned parties should act upon and necessary orders have to be passed by the District Registrar, Salem and in this regard, the contra plea raised by the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association had been negated by the Inspector General of Registration. 13. When that being the position, it seems that, the District Registrar, Salem had passed some adverse order against the Petitioner Association, which was challenged before this Court by filing WP.No.15095/2003, where the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association herein/3rd respondent therein, through his learned Counsel, had taken a stand that he would take necessary steps to revive the dissolved Association and also to take appropriate steps for getting back its properties. Only the said stand taken by him through his counsel, was recorded by the learned Judge and the said writ petition was dismissed with an observation that in view of the said stand taken by the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association herein/3rd respondent therein, the implementation of the impugned orders did not arise at all. 14. However, by giving a wrong interpretation to the said recording of the statement of the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association by this Court in the said order, the District Registrar, Salem, had straightaway passed a cryptic order on 10.09.2003, which is impugned in WP.No.25942/2003, directing that the dissolved Association is revived. 15. In this regard, as has been already pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner Association, such automatic revival of a dissolved Association is not possible in view of the provisions of section 41 of the Act. The language used in section 41 that is "a registered Society may, by Special Resolution, determine that it shall be dissolved and thereupon it shall be dissolved forthwith or at the time specified in the Resolution:. The language used in section 41 that is "a registered Society may, by Special Resolution, determine that it shall be dissolved and thereupon it shall be dissolved forthwith or at the time specified in the Resolution:. In view of the said language used in section 41 of the Act, as quoted above, once a Special Resolution is passed and it has been determined that it has been dissolved, then the Association shall stand dissolved forthwith. In case, if a date is mentioned in the Resolution, the Association is said to be dissolved from that date. In the case on hand, the Resolution, especially, Resolutions No.3 and 6 is very specific and Resolution No.3 states that the Association, viz., the old/dissolved Association, with Registration No.217/71, is dissolved and it has been resolved accordingly. Resolution No.6 says that, as per the said Resolution, the Association has been dissolved on that date itself. 16. Once the Association is dissolved within the meaning of section 41, whether the same can be revived automatically by merely giving a request by one of the Members of the dissolved Association/Society and whether such an order for automatic revival can be passed by the District Registrar, Salem is the interesting question, which can easily be answered, as there is no other provisions available in the Act for such an automatic revival by mere giving a request or letter to that effect by any Member of the dissolved Association and such a procedure for revival cannot be adopted by the District Registrar, Salem. 17. Once the word, dissolved forthwith is used by the Legislature, the intention of the Legislature is very clear and unambiguous. If it is dissolved forthwith, it cannot be revived by a simple communication by the District Registrar, Salem as that kind of the action by the District Registrar, Salem is concerned, would go against the spirit of section 41 of the Act, as the language used in the Legislation is very particular. 18. Moreover, under section 42 of the Act, aftermath of the dissolution has been mentioned. Once a Society got dissolved, then the properties shall be dealt with in the manner provided in the said provision itself. Accordingly, after satisfying all debts and liabilities, the remaining properties or wealth, shall not be given or distributed to the Members of the dissolved Association/Society. Moreover, under section 42 of the Act, aftermath of the dissolution has been mentioned. Once a Society got dissolved, then the properties shall be dealt with in the manner provided in the said provision itself. Accordingly, after satisfying all debts and liabilities, the remaining properties or wealth, shall not be given or distributed to the Members of the dissolved Association/Society. It shall be given only to some other registered Society/Association having the same objects or similar objects. Since this is the intention of the Legislature, the 2nd order passed by the District Registrar, Salem dated 12.09.2003 which is impugned in WP.No.29259/2003, permitting the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association to have police assistance to retrieve the properties, is totally against the said provision of the Act, viz., Section 42. 19. Once the Association/Society is dissolved, the properties cannot be given back to any of the Members of the dissolved Association/Society. In stead, after settling the dues and liabilities, the remaining or residual properties or wealth, shall be given to similarly placed Association/Society with similar objects. 20. Here, in the case on hand, the Petitioner Association, admittedly, is having the similar object and is functioning for such object and also in the same area. It is also a fact that many of the Members of the dissolved Association had already became the Members of the Petitioner Association and even if more Members from the old/dissolved Association come and join, they would also be taken into consideration, of course, after completing the procedural formalities. 21. When that being the position, the properties once vest with the petitioner Association, cannot be retrieved by an order passed by the District Registrar, Salem seeking police protection and these kind of orders are in complete violation of the provisions of the Act, especially, sections 41 and 42 and therefore, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the said impugned orders are not only unjustifiable but also unlawful and such orders could not have been passed by the District Registrar, Salem. 22. Moreover, the issue has already been decided by the Civil Court in the suit unsuccessfully filed by the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, as against which, admittedly, no appeal has been preferred by him and therefore, the findings and conclusion arrived at by the Civil Court has become final. 22. Moreover, the issue has already been decided by the Civil Court in the suit unsuccessfully filed by the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association, as against which, admittedly, no appeal has been preferred by him and therefore, the findings and conclusion arrived at by the Civil Court has become final. Further, as per the Special Resolution dated 16.05.1998, the Association/Society, i.e., old/dissolved Association, has already been dissolved from that date itself in view of the language used in section 41 of the Act. Therefore, there is no scope of revival of such Association by merely giving a representation or petition to the District Registrar, Salem. 23. The recording of the statement made on behalf of the Secretary of the old/dissolved Association that steps would be taken or effective steps would be taken for revival of the Association/Society and to get back the properties is concerned, it cannot be done by way of a mere representation to the District Registrar, Salem to pass an order for revival of the Association/Society as that would go to the root of the matter since it is against the provisions of sections 41 and 42 of the Act. 24. Therefore, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the impugned orders are, not only unlawful, but also unsustainable and therefore, the same cannot have any plausible reason to be sustained. The natural corollary would be that, the Special Resolution passed by the old/dissolved Association/Society and the aftermath action taken place, shall be approved by the District Registrar, Salem for which request had already been given both, by the petitioner Association as well as the old/dissolved Association. 25. For all these reasons and discussions made above, these writ petitions are allowed on the following terms:- [a] The impugned orders passed by the District Registrar, Salem dated 10.09.2003 and 12.09.2003 respectively in Na.Ka.Nos.7374/B3/03 and 7374/A3/03-2 are quashed ; and [b] The District Registrar, Salem, is hereby directed to pass necessary orders of approval on the request made by the Petitioner Association in accepting the Special Resolution made by the old/dissolved Association dated 16.05.1998 dissolving the said Association and entrusting the movable and immovable properties to and in favour of the petitioner Association, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.