K. S. BHAKTHAVATSALAM, J.

( 1 ) UP in this second appeal.

( 2 ) THE substantial question of law framed at the time of admitting the appeal is, "is the suit of the plaintiff-respondent maintainable in view of Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure taking into consideration the relief sought by him?"

( 3 ) THE plaintiff filed the suit for declaration that he belongs to "koshti" caste and that a direction may be issued to the director of public instructions or his subordinates to rectify the records by changing the words "hindu lingayat" and substituting the words "hindu koshti".

( 4 ) THE case of the plaintiff is that he is a resident of hulyal and his father and forefathers also came from the same place and since time immemorial they are following the business of weaving known as "koshti" in marathi and "jardar" in kannada. It is claimed that the plaintiff and his family members follow the same profession. Plaintiff alleges that he is a graduate of Karnataka university and is pursuing his studies. While entering his name in the school register, his name was shown as hindu lingayat but there is no religion in India as hindu lingayat. According to the plaintiff, lingayat is only a cas

Click Here to Read the rest of this document