VENKAYYA Vs. SRIRAMAMURTHY AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals arise out of the Judgment and decree in O. Sec. 102/49 on the file of the Subordinate Judge at Gluru. The plaintiff had filed A. Sec. 761/50 and the 3rd defendant A. Sec. 258/51. The plaintiff and the 3rd defendant are brothers. The plaintiff, claiming; that himself and the third defendant are the hereditary archakas of Sri Visweswaraswami Varu of Bhadriraju Kondapadu, instituted the suit for a declaration of their occupancy rights in the plaint A schedule lands and to possession thereof so long as archakatwam service was rendered. The basis of the claim is twofold : (1) that the grant was to the ancestors of the plaintiff and 3rd defendant burdened with the obligation of rendering service; alternatively, (2) that what was granted in inam to the temple was that only the melwaram, the Kudivaram right vesting in the archakas.

(2.) The 1st and 2nd defendants were the trustees appointed by the Hindu Religious Endowments Board. They resisted the suit by filing a written statement in which they denied that the plaintiff and the 3rd defendant are hereditary archakas, that the grant was to the archakas and lastly that what was granted to the temple was only melwaram.

(3.) Several issues were raised on the pleadings, but it is sufficient to refer only to issues Nos. 3, 9 and 5, namely,