.1. The plaintiffs 1 to 9 who were successful before the trial court and lost before the first appellate court are the appellants in this second appeal. The parties to this appeal will

.be referred for convenience as arrayed before the trial Court.

.2. At the time of admission, the following substantial question of law was framed by this Court:

.“Was not the lower appellate court in error in holding that in view of the decision in Ex.B.2, the jurisdiction of the civil court is barred under section 108 of Act 22 of 1959 and more particularly in view of the decision of this Court in Sri Thulukka Choodamanai Mariammam Temple etc., v. Subramania Pandaram , 1986 (99) L.W. 606 ?”

3. The plaintiffs pleaded that they are the hereditary Poojaries and sthanikars of Arulmighu Sri Prasanna Venkataramanaswami Temple, Chinna Thirupathi, that their hereditary rights has been declared in O.S. No. 779 of 1930 as well as in O.S. No. 153 of 1973 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sankari, that the plaintiffs and their predecessors are and were performing pooja for the last two centuries and more, the plaintiffs not only do the service of Archaka but also the service of Paricha