A 13 under s. 3 2 of the Reduction of Rent Act reducing the rates of rent payable in respect of delta dry ryoti lands in Kalipatnam village.
51 per acre by way of water rate.
Shree Raja Kandrrgula Srinivasa Jagannadha Rao Panthulu Bahadur was the Inamdar of village Kalipatnam in Narsapuram Taluk in the West Godavari District.
The Inam Settlement Officer, Vijayawadha, then took proceedings to determine whether Kalipatnam was an, inam estate as defined in s. 2 7 of the Madras Estates Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari Act XXVI of 1948.
A 1 holding that the suit village was an inam estate.
1619 and 1620 Appeals from the judgment and order dated April 17, 1964 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Appeal Suits Nos.
21 of 1959 and 362 of 1958 respectively.
Feeling aggrieved by these two orders the appellant instituted the suit.
The trial Court decreed the suit in part but the High Court to which both parties preferred appeals held that the Civil Courts had numberjurisdiction to entertain the suit.
On November 2, 1948, the Government issued a numberification Ex.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
The necessary relevant facts in brief may only be mentioned.
A 13 dated November 2, 1949 reducing the rates of rent in respect of the delta dry ryoti lands in village Kalipatnam under the, Madras Estates Land Reduction of Rent Act XXX of 1947, hereafter called the Reduction of Rent Act .
6 in both the appeals .
R. Chaudhuri and K. Rajendra Chaudruri, for respondent No.
V. Rangam, for respondents Nos.
1619 and 1620 of 1968 on certificate by the High Court arise out of the same suit and are directed against a companymon judgment and decree of the High Court disposing of two cross appeals pre sented in that Court and will, therefore, be disposed of,by one judgment.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Dua, J. These two appeals Civil Appeals Nos.
1 3, in the appeals .
After inquiry he made the order dated May 31, 1950 Ex.
out of which the present appeals arise.
Narsaraju, B. Parthasarathy and Subba Rao, for the appellants in both the appeals .
It relates to the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts to entertain and decide the present suit questioning the legality of the numberification Ex.
