- (1.) THE plaintiff in O. S. No. 63 of 1972 on the file of the Court of the subordinate Judge, Kovvur preferred this appeal aggrieved by the dismissal of the suit by judgment and decree dated 25. 11. 1981.
(2.) THE plaintiff claims to be a charitable institution namely Sri Gandrapu gangaraju Choultry, Polavaram village in West Godavari District, represented by its Executive Officer appointed under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966. The suit is filed seeking a decree against the defendants for recovery of possession of the plaint schedule properties allegedly endowed to the plaintiff choultry by one Gandrapu Gangaraju and mesne profits from the date of the suit. The plaintiff also sought for rendition of accounts claiming that the 1st defendant was managing the suit schedule properties as well as the choultry. The defendants 16 and 18 are the brothers of the 1st defendant whereas the defendant No. 15 is the purchaser of one of the items of the suit property from the defendant No. 1. The defendants 2 to 14 and 17 were allegedly in possession of the suit schedule properties as tenants of the plaintiff choultry under the 1st defendant. The suit was contested by all the defendants except defendants 12, 14 and 15 who remained ex parte. After hearing both the parties, the Court below by judgment and decree dated 25. 11. 1981 dismissed the suit with costs payable by the Department of Endowments, represented by the Assistant commissioner of Endowments, Eluru. Hence, this Appeal.
(3.) THE plaint averments, in brief, are as follows : the plaintiff choultry was constituted in the year 1910 by late Gandrapu gangaraju who endowed the suit schedule properties to the plaintiff choultry under a Registered Will dated 7. 10. 1910. The daughter-in-law of late gangaraju by name Smt. Mangamma and two others were named as Trustees under the Will authorizing them to fill-up the vacancies if any in the Trust Board with suitable persons, making it clear that the first trustee should be chosen only from the family of the testator. Under the Will late Gangaraju also gave consent for adoption of a boy by his daughter-in-law Smt. Mangamma since his only son Gandrapu Lakshmi Narasimharao was issueless and predeceased him. It was averred in the plaint that during the lifetime of Gangaraju, the suit properties were handed over to the plaintiff choultry and Smt. Magamma had adopted a son who was also named as Gangaraju. After the lifetime of Gangaraju, his daughter-in-law Smt. Mangamma acted as the first member of the trust board and was performing Annadanam. The suit properties were also maintained by her as managing trustee of the plaintiff choultry. After her death, her adopted son gangaraju took up management of the choultry as well as the properties endowed to it and continued Annadanam in the choultry. After his death, his son -the 1st defendant also performed Annadanam in the choultry for sometime and was managing the suit schedule lands by leasing out the same to others. However, he discontinued the same for the last ten years and leased out the choultry building to the defendant No. 11 for running a military hotel. In the circumstances, though an Executive Officer was appointed by the Commissioner of endowments to manage the affairs of the plaintiff choultry, the 1st defendant failed to hand over the records and other properties to the Executive Officer. The defendants 2 to 15 and 17 also refused to deliver the properties in spite of notices issued by the Executive Officer. Hence, the suit alleging that on account of the collusion among the defendants the plaintiff choultry was being deprived of its legitimate income and that on appointment of the Executive officer under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966, who was a de jure trustee, the 1st defendant ceased to have any right to remain in possession and management of the suit properties.;