M APPALA RAMANUJACHARYULU Vs. M VENKATANARASIMHACHARYULU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only question that is urged for our decision is whether, on the facts and in the circumstances the endowment of items 65 to 73 of the plaint A Schedule settled by the late Ramanujacharyulu under Ex. A-11 dated 21/09/1929 is nominal or real.

(2.) In order to appreciate the scope of the question, it is necessary to briefly state the facts that gave rise to the same. Ramanujacharyulu, the grandfather of the plaintiff-appellant herein, who was driven out of his family by his father while he was quite young, had settled in the Agency areas and worked as Karnam of several villages for a number of years and earned considerable properties and died in or about the year 1932, leaving behind him his wife Latchamma, a divided son the Ist defendant herein, a keep and some properties. In the year 1918, he created an endowment of Ac. 66-75 cents of rain-fed lands which fell to his share in the family division with his only son, the 1st defendant in the year 1916, for the sole purpose of performing Sri Sitarama Swamy at Korukonda every year in the manner stated by him from generation to generation. He had also obtained a sale deed in the name of his wife Latchamma under Ex. A-10 dated 24-7-1923 for a building in Sitanagaram for a sum of Rs. 600.00 for the purpose of maintaining a choultry therein. The consideration of Rs. 600.00 is said to have been paid from Latchamms Stridhanam. But, however the very sale deed Ex. A-10 indicates the purpose of the sale being to convert the building into a choultry and to run the same for charitable purpose and for the benefit of passers-by poor and other deserving persons. On 21-9-1929 a registered settlement deed Ex. A-11 setting items 65 to 73 of the plaint A Schedule comprising Ac. 33-7- cents of wet lands in Sitanagaram was made by Ramanujacharyulu. The document recited that the property was in fact settled for specific purpose of the maintenance of the choultry purchased in the name of his wife under Ex. A-10 . In this document, three pointed by the settlor Ramanujacharyulu. The 5th defendant contested the plaintiffs suit for declaration that the properties are not endowed to the choultry and they are joint family properties, on the ground that they were endowed irrevocably under Ex. A-11 for a charitable purpose. The plea of the appellant has not been accepted by the trial Court as well as the learned single Judge of this Court.

(3.) In support of his submission that the endowment in question is nominal out not real, Mr. Jagnnadha Rao has placed reliance on the following circumstances : (I) that there was no mutation of patta inrespect of the lands in question in favour of the choultry; (ii) that no ledgers and accounts have been maintained; (iii) that no leases have been granted by the trustees; (iv) that no investment of the income from the lands has been made nor any purchase of property or lands has been made by the trustees from and out of the income of the lands and (v) that there is no evidence of payment of taxes by the trustees.