PUSHPAGIRI MATH Vs. KOPPARAJU VEERABHADRA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted. Substitution allowed.

(2.) Though the dasti notice had been served on the L.R., he refused to accept as per the statement made in the affidavit filed in support of the dasti service. Accordingly, we have heard the counsel for the appellant.

(3.) The case of the respondent set up in the plaint was that originally the property belonged to the appellant Shri Pushpagiri Math. Subsequently, the property was granted in favour of one K. Narasingaiah, the great grand-father of the plaintiff as Bhatavarthi Inam by Sankaracharya who was Peetadhipathi of the math. He was in possession and enjoyment as a grantee. Subsequently, he acquired title by prescription. The trial Court decreed the suit in O.S. No.66 / 68 dated September 30, 1974. On appeal, the Additional Subordinate Judge, Narasaraopet in his judgment and decree dated December 29, 1979 in A.S. No. 218/78 held that Ex. A-1 to Ex. A-10 positively show that the suit land is a Bhatavarthi Inam land and was in possession of the ancestors of the respondent-plaintiff since 1950 under Ex. A-1. The land, therefore, is a Bhatavarthi Inam Land as evidenced by Ex. A-1 to A-10 granted originally by Bhatavarthi in or around the year 1900 for rendering service that was being rendered by the plaintiff-math to the appellant. Math is the real owner of the land granted as an inam to the respondent-plaintiff. It was also found that Exs. B-1 to B-14 and B-17 would prove conclusive evidence that the appellant is the absolute owner of the land and the respondent-plaintiff and his ancestors were permitted to continue in possession and enjoyment of the land as inamdars of service rendered and to be rendered by them to the institution. The appellate Court accordingly held that the decree for declaration of title and injunction cannot be granted against the real owner. In S.A. No. 191/80, the High Court of A.P. by judgment and decree dated March 8, 1983 reversed the judgment of the appellate Court and confirmed that of the trial Court. Thus this appeal by special leave.