Varadachariar, J.

1. This appeal and the connected revision petition arise out of an application under Section 80(2) of the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act (I of 1925), in respect of the temple of Sri Ranganadhaswami at Hospet. In the first instance, it was claimed both before the Board and before the District Court that the temple was a private one but that part of the claim has not been pressed and the only point remaining to be determined is whether or not it falls within the definition of "an excepted temple" in Section 9(5) of the Act.

2. The learned District Judge has referred to one or two errors into which the Board had fallen when passing its order dated 21st April, 1926. As the learned District Judge has dealt with the matter fully, I do not see that anything turns upon the errors found in the Boards order. The learned District Judge has held that though the petitioners grandfather one Mr. Chelapathi Rao Naidu was the founder (wholly or at least in part) of the temple about the year 1870 it is not possible to say that the right to succession to the office of trustee in this case is hereditary, as required by Section 9, Clause 5(b) (as it stood prior to the ame