( 1 ) THIS appeal is by the 1st defendant against the judgment of the subordinate Judge, Bapatla. The 1st respondent laid an action in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Bapatla for a declaration that the order of the Collector in proceedings under the Madras Hereditary Village Offices Act, dated 5th August, 1950, made in appeal from the order of the Sub-Collector appointing the 1st defendant as the karnam of Bapatla was illegal. The facts giving rise to this appeal may be briefly set out.

( 2 ) ORIGINALLY there was one karnam for the whole of the village of Bapatla. The plaintiff belonged to the family which held that post hereditarily from time immemorial, his father Venkatachalapathi Rao being the last. There was also an assistant karnam of the village and 1st defendant s father was appointed to the post on 10th August, 1929. In 1948, there was a bifurcation of Bapatla into two villages, east and west. The plaintiff s father was appointed karnam of Bapatla west and the 1st defendant who then happened to be assistant karnam was appointed as the karnam of Bapatla East, the post of assistant having been abolished. At the time of the proposals for the appointment of karnam for Ba

Click Here to Read the rest of this document