ORDER : (Prayers in C.R.P. No.2184 of 2020: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 20.11.2020 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Dharmapuri made in I.A. No.2 of 2020 in O.S. No.48 of 2020. In C.M.A. No.1856 of 2020: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of CPC praying to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 20.11.2020 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Dharmapuri made in I.A. No.3 of 2020 in O.S. No.48 of 2020.) 1. The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the trial Court appointing the Advocate Commissioner to inspect the account books and Resolution books of M/s. Sri Divyam Educational & Charitable Trust relating to the year 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 and to file a detailed report. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed challenging the order passed by the Trial Court granting temporary injunction in favour of the respondents/plaintiffs restraining the petitioners herein from causing disturbance to the right of the 5th respondent/5th plaintiff to act as Managing Trustee of M/s. Sri Divyam Educational & Charitable Trust. 2. The respondents herein filed a suit seeking following reliefs:- 3. Pending the above suit, the respondents filed the above applications for appointment of Advocate Commissioner and temporary injunction and aggrieved by the allowing of those applications, the petitioners are before this Court. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner by taking this Court to the order impugned in Civil Miscellaneous Application submitted that the Trial Court granted injunction without recording any prima facie case and balance of convenience. The learned counsel would further submit that if the temporary injunction sought for is granted as prayed for, it would amount to granting the main prayer in the suit for removal of the 5th petitioner from the post of Managing Trustee and other petitioners from the post of Trustees. The learned counsel submitted that by way of an interim order, the Court below ought not to have granted main relief. 5. The learned counsel submitted that by way of an interim order, the Court below ought not to have granted main relief. 5. As far as appointment of Advocate Commissioner to inspect the accounts of the Trustee is concerned, the learned counsel submits that only if the respondents succeed in the main prayer in the Suit, they are entitled to inspect the accounts and even before consideration of the main prayer, the respondents are not entitled to seek appointment of Advocate Commissioner to go into the accounts of the Trust. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioners by taking advantage of their position in the affairs of the Trust making encumbrance of the Trust properties and causing disturbance to the Trust and therefore necessary interim order shall be passed to protect the Trust properties. The learned counsel also submitted that report submitted by the Advocate Commissioner with regard to the accounts maintained by the Trust would not cause any prejudice to the petitioners and hence the order appointing the Advocate Commissioner need not be interfered with. 7. A perusal of the plaint prayers would suggest that the respondents are seeking direction for removal of the 1st petitioner and other petitioners from the post of Managing Trustee and other Trustees. By way of interim order, they are also seeking injunction restraining the petitioners from interfering with the right of the 5th respondent/5th plaintiff to act as Managing Trustee of the Sri Divyam Educational & Charitable Trust. 8. It is settled law that the main prayer sought for in the Suit cannot be granted by way of an interim relief. Only if the respondents succeed in the suit, they are entitled to pray for removal of petitioners from the post of Managing Trustee and other Trustees. On the other hand, if the interim order sought for by the respondents is granted, it would amount to removal of petitioners even before the commencement of trial. Therefore, the Court below ought not to have granted interim injunction which is in the nature of granting main relief that too without recording the prima facie case and balance of convenience. 9. Therefore, the Court below ought not to have granted interim injunction which is in the nature of granting main relief that too without recording the prima facie case and balance of convenience. 9. From the reading of the averments of plaint and plaint prayer, it is clear that the petitioners are acting as Managing Trustee and other Trustees of M/s.Sri Divyam Educational & Charitable Trust and the respondents are seeking direction for removal of petitioners from the said posts. Therefore, granting an interim injunction as prayed for by the respondents would amount to granting of main relief in the Suit. Accordingly, the order impugned in C.M.A. No.1856 of 2020 granting temporary injunction in favour of the respondents/plaintiffs is liable to the set aside and the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in C.M.A. No.1856 of 2020 is allowed. 10. During the arguments in Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in C.M.A. No.1856 of 2020, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioners are making attempt to encumber the Trust properties indiscriminately. It is made clear that allowing of C.M.A. And dismissal of the present injunction petition will not come in the way of the respondents seeking proper interim relief with regard to alleged attempt by petitioners to alienate trust properties, if any. 11. In Civil Revision Petition, the Advocate Commissioner has already filed an interim report dated 17.09.2020. By way of the impugned order passed by the Trial Court, he has been directed to go into the accounts of the Trust and to file a detailed report. In fact the petitioners herein filed the income tax returns of the above mentioned Trust for the assessment years 2014–2015 to 2018-2019 as Exhibits R14 to R18 marked in the interlocutory application. The respondents herein seek appointment of Advocate Commissioner to inspect the accounts books and resolution books of the Trust pertain to the year 2018-2019 and 2019-2020. The report of the Advocate Commissioner with regard to the accounts and resolutions passed by the Trust would certainly help the Court to decide the controversies involved in the Suit. On perusal of the pleadings, it is seen that the main controversy in the Suit is regarding a resolution passed by the Trust accepting the alleged resignation of the respondents. The report of the Advocate Commissioner with regard to the accounts and resolutions passed by the Trust would certainly help the Court to decide the controversies involved in the Suit. On perusal of the pleadings, it is seen that the main controversy in the Suit is regarding a resolution passed by the Trust accepting the alleged resignation of the respondents. Therefore, the report filed by the Advocate Commissioner regarding the accounts and resolutions of the Trust will help the Court to decide the controversy involved in the case in a better way. Therefore I do not find anything to interfere with the order passed by the Trial Court appointing the Advocate Commissioner. 12. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.