( 1 ) PLAINTIFFS are the appellants. Their suit for damages in a sum of Rs. 10 Lakhs against the State of Andhra Pradesh has been dismissed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Kurnool.

( 2 ) PLAINTIFFS 1 to 5 are the sons, and 6th plaintiff is the wife of late Challa Chinnappa Reddy. The deceased and the 1st plaintiff were accused in Crime No. 18/1977 of Owk Police Station in Banganapalle Taluk of Kurnool District. They were arrested on 25-4-1977 and remanded to judicial custody on 26-4-1977. They were lodged in Cell No. 7 of Sub-Jail of Koilakuntla. On the night intervening 5th and 6th May 1977, at about 330 a. m. , some miscreants gained entry into the Sub-Jail, hurled bombs into Cell No. 7, and killed the deceased. The 1st plaintiff escaped with injuries. The said incident took place, according to the plaintiffs, on account of malfeasance and misfeasance of the defendant-State and its subordinate officials in guarding the sub-jail premises. The deceased was a rich and influential person, and his death has deprived his family and children of his guidance and experienced management. Though the deceased and the 1st plaintiff apprised the higher authorities of danger to their lives in the jail premises, they say, the concerned officials failed to take appropriate care. "there was breach of duty and callous negligence on the part of the defendant and his servants which facilitated the commission of the offence resulting in the death of Chinnappa Reddy. It is the statutory duty of the defendant and his servants to protect the life of the prisoner and is liable to compensate for the loss of the life of the prisoner". The loss of the deceased is grievous and fatal to the prospects of his children and family. The damage suffered by them is estimated at Rs. 10 Lakhs, which, they say, they are entitled to recover from the State.

( 3 ) THE State denied its liability for any damages. It submitted : "it is absolutely incorrect to allege that the said incident took place on account of the malfeasance and misfeasance of the defendant and his subordinates in guarding the Sub-Jail premises". It was submitted that the Taluk Office, Sub-Treasury, and the Sub-Jail are situated within the same premises side by side, and that all the three buildings are properly guarded. The Sub-Jail guards had taken all the necessary measures and there was no lapse or negligence on their part. "the police-guards are only responsible for preventing the prisoners from escaping from the Sub-Jail. " It was further averred :"this defendant is also not aware that prior to the said incident, the local circumstances indicated threat to the life of Chinnappa Reddy and the higher authorities were apprised of the same and requested to provide proper guard and protection. . . . . . The incident occurred for reasons beyond the control of anybody and the police-guard who could not be aware of the occurrence till it had actually happened. This defendant is not answerable for the acts beyond his control, much less he is liable for compensation. . . . Even if there is any negligence on the part of the officials in guarding the prison, the State is not liable to be sued for damages or compensation as maintenance of jails is a sovereign function of the State. In such a case the plaintiffs have to seek their remedy, if any, against the particular officers said to be negligent. . . . . "

( 4 ) ON the above pleadings, the learned Subordinate Judge framed the following issues :" (1) whether the plaintiffs are entitled to the damages from the defendant. If so, what amount ? (2) Whether the suit is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties ? (3) Whether the maintenance of jails comes within the sovereign acts of the State and whether the defendant is not liable for the incident dated 6-5-1977? (4) To what relief?"additional issue : "whether the suit is barred by period of limitation?"

( 5 ) THE learned Subordinate Judge held, on a consideration of the material placed before