1. The petitioner seeks review of the judgment of David Christian, J. (as the learned Judge then was) in S.A.No.1573 of 1987. The grounds urged for review are as follows:

It has been found by the Courts below that the plaintiff’s grandfather and father were performing the services in the temple from the year 1922. Still they chose to dismiss the suit filed by the plaintiff for a permanent injunction preventing the defendants from interfering otherwise than by due process of law. Having observed that the plaintiff questioned the title of the temple to the suit lands, the learned Judge ought to have found that the plaintiff and his father were prima facie entitled to ryotwari patta under the provisions of the Minor Inams Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari Act, 1963. In the submission of the learned Counsel, the description of the plaintiff’s father as the temporary oczhiandar for the time being in the proceedings of the Settlement Tahsilder under Exs.A-1 and AA2 was only incidental to the grant of ryotwari patta and made in a summary manner. The learned Judge erred in taking into consideration that the family of the original grantee became extinct and that prior to the