S V SUBBA RAO Vs. ASSISTANT COMMR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sri P.L. Narsimha Sarma, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that only an appeal lies against the impugned order and that there is, however an unreported judgment of M. Ramchandra Raju, J. that against the decision in a suit filed under Section 78 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act 17 of 1966, only a revision petition lies. As the question is not free from difficulty, it would be bstter if it is resolved by a Division Bench. Place the papers before the Honourable the Chief Justice for appropriate orders. Accordingly this petition came on for hearing before the Division Bench and the Court passed the following :---

(2.) The short question that arises in this revision is whether an appeal lies against the order of the District Court in a suit filed under Section 78 of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions & endowments Act 17/1966.

(3.) The Deputy Commissioner of Endowments passed an order holding that the suit temple is a public temple. Aggrieved by the same, the heriditary trustee filed O.S. 107/78 in the District Court, Guntur, challenging the finding of the Deputy Commissioner. The District Court, dismissed the suit holding that the suit temple is a public temple. Against the order of the District Court, the heriditary trustee filed the present CRP under Sec. 81 of the Act. A priliminary objection is taken by the rcspon dent that the revision is not maintainable, and the petitioner has to file a regular appeal paying the court fee provided therefor. The question for consideration is whether an appeal lies against the order of the District Court under Section 78 of the Act.