EMBA TIPPAMMA Vs. NAGAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Third defendant in O.S. 1/1978, on the file of the District Judge, Raichur, is the appellant. Respondents 1 to 4 plaintiffs - after obtaining leave of the Court filed the suit, under S.92, C.P.C. for the following reliefs :--

(2.) Among the several contentions urged by defendants in the written statement, it was contended that suit is not maintainable and is barred under S.92(2), C.P.C. The learned Judge framed 18 issues covering all the disputes. In view of the arguments advanced by Sri Manohar Rao Jagirdhar in this appeal, the one question that goes to the root of the matter is the maintainability of the suit in the light of S.92(2), C.P.C. read with Hyderabad Endowment Regulations, 1349 Fasli (1940 AD). On this question, the relevant issue reads thus :

(3.) Dealing with S.92(2), C.P.C. and the provisions of Hyderabad Endowment Regulations, the observations of the learned Judge are :-