RAJAH VENKATA NARASIMHA APPA RAO BAHADUR Vs. RAJAH SURNANI VENKATA PURUSHOTTAM JUGGANADHA GOPALA ROW BAHADUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case the plaintiffs sued to recover possession of certain moveable property which was in the possession of Venkata Chinnaya Rao at the time of her death in 1902 and also of a house built by her and of the Darmakartaship of a certain temple which was under her management at the time of her death, and which then passed into the possession of her husband who is the defendant. The Subordinate Judge dismissed the suit as regards themoveable property, which he held was Chinnaya Rao's absolute property, and which, therefore, passed to her husband on her death. The other property he decreed to the plaintiffs. Against that decree the defendant appeals. The plaintiffs filed a memorandum of objections as regards the moveable property, but it was not moved before us.

(2.) The relationship of the parties and of various members of the family is shewn below:

(3.) Jaganatha Lakshma Rao and his brother Venkatagopala, Narasimha Rao, who is the father of the plaintiffs, lived as joint members of a Hindu family under the Mitakshara law until 1855 when they divided all their property. Jagannatha under the partition obtained 1 and 1/4 share of the Mailavaram estate and also the Dharmakartaship of the Dwaraka Tirumala Temple which is in dispute. In 1859 he made a will in which inter alia he directed that his wife should "conduct the Darmakartaship" of the temple. He died in the same year, and as he had no sons, his property passed to his widow Venkamma Rao. In 1877 she executed a deed of gift in favour of her only child, Venkata Chinnaya Rao, the wife of the defendant, whereby she gave her at once the 1 and 1/4 share in the Mailavaram estate and also the Dharmakartaship of the temple, but retained one village of the estate for her own maintenance and also the house in which she lived and gave these to her daughter after her death. She died in 1893 and her daughter Chinnaya Rao died in 1902. It will be observed from the genealogical tree that Chinnaya Rao had two sons, but both of them died many years before her. On her death her husband, the present defendant, took possession of the Dharmakartaship and of the house with, its site and grounds. The present plantiffs, it will be observed from the family tree, are the sons of Venkatagopala Narasimha Rao, the brother who divided from Jaganatha Lakshma Rao in 1855. They got possession of the 1 and 1/4 share of the Mailavaram estate on the death of Chinnaya Rao and the defendant's suit to recover it founded on Jagannatha's will of 1859 has been dismissed by our judgment in Appeal No. 98 of 1904 delivered to-day. The present suit is brought by the plaintiffs as reversioners of Jagannatha Lakshma Rao to recover the house above referred to and the Dharmakartaship.