SATYANARAYANA RAO, J. :- The plaintiff who is the appellant herein laid this suit to establish his right to certain lands described in the plaint schedule and also to have it declared that the temple in B-schedule is a private one and that the order of the District Court in O. P. No. 23 of 1946 does not bind him. The suit was dismissed by the learned Subordinate Judge. The properties now claimed in the suit were owned by his adoptive father one Indrakanti Seshavadhanulu and were his self-acquired properties. Some of the properties were inherited by Seshavadhanulu front his brother, Rangavadhanulu, who was also the founder of the temple. He claimed the suit properties as the adopted son of Seshavadhanulu and also by adverse possession and his contention in the suit was that the temple was a private temple and not a public one and therefore the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Board had no right to interfere with its administration and recover possession of the property in pursuance of the order in O. P. No. 23 of 1946, District Court, Kurnool.

2. The plaintiff was adopted by Seshavadhanulu sometime before 16th May, 1919. On that day, Seshavadhanulu executed Exhibit A-1 whic