RENTALA NARASIMHA RAO Vs. RENTALA VENKATARAMANA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent, a minor, filed the suit out of which this second appeal arises for a declaration that the order appointing the appellant as the Karnam of the village of Kapa-varam is illegal and ultra vires, to register him as the Karnam and to appoint a deputy for him.

(2.) The plaintiff's case is that his grandfather Rentala Achyutharamayya who was the holder of the office in question died in 1928 leaving two sons, the first and second defendants, that the plaintiff's father the second defendant who was the elder of the two sons was then holding the Karnam's office of another village, that the Revenue Divisional Officer appointed the first defendant the younger son ignoring the senior line of the plaintiff and that the first defendant's appointment is contrary to the provisions of Section 10(2) of the Madras Hereditary Village Offices Act.

(3.) The first defendant contended that the plaint should have been filed in the Revenue Courts under Section 13 (1) of the Act and that the Civil Courts have no jurisdiction to try the suit. The plaintiff then withdrew the reliefs regarding the registry of the office in his name and the appointment of a deputy and confined the suit to one for a declaration of the invalidity of the defendant's appointment.