Decided on December 31,1971



A.D.V. Reddy, J. - (1.) These are appeals by the plaintiffs against the judgments and decrees in O. S. Nos. 38 and 39 of 1959 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Ongole, dismissing the suits filed under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for framing schemes.
(2.) In the village of Nagulapadu, hamlet of Addanki, there are two tanks, one by the name of ' Mangamuri Papayya Kunta ' and the other by name ' Gangadevi Kunta. About two centuries ago, one Mr. Travers, the then Collector of Nellore made certain grants for the upkeep and maintenance of the said tanks. According to the plaintiffs, who are two of the villagers and have chosen to file the suits for framing the schemes after obtaining the sanction under Section 92 CPC., for the ' Mangamuri Papaiah Kunta ', Ac. 54-22 cents comprised in S. No. 2008 in the village of South Addanki was granted by the said Collector and this was confirmed in Title Deed No. 1932 and for the other tank viz, ' Gangadevi Kunta', the same Collector had granted Ac. 28-44 cents Ac. 6-42 cents comprised in S. No. 2037 and Ac. 20-45 cents comprised in S. No. 2066 in the same village as Inam for the maintenance of the said tank and this was also confirmed in Title Deed No. 1928, that these are granted in favour of one of the ancestors of the defendants who are common in both the suits, that for the last 20 years they have neglected the maintenance of the tanks and have been appropriating the income thereof and hence the suits for the removal of the present defendants for the acts of malfeasance and misfeasance attributed to them for making them liable to account for the income and for framing of a scheme with regard to both the Tanks.
(3.) In both the suits, the defendants contended that their ancestor one Mangamuri Papaiah himself dug the suit tanks in his own land and with his own funds, that the lands were not granted to him as inam and what was granted was only the revenue payable thereon for the upkeep of the tanks, and that he and his descendants including the defendants have been maintaining the tanks in good repairs. They further contended that the suits are not maintainable under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari Act of 1956. After passing of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966, they have amended the written statements and contended that under the provisions of the said Act also, the suits are not maintainable.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.