Venkatasubba Rao, J.

1. These are petitions for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council (the judgment to be appealed from is reported in H.R.E. Board, Madras v. Koteswara Rao (1937) 446 L.W. 587. All of them excepting one may be easily disposed of. The question raised in each case is whether the property was a gift to the God or was an archaka service inam. The point turned upon the effect of the inam proceedings and it was held in an affirming judgment, upon a construction of the various inam papers, that the gifts were intended for the deity.

2. That the property in each case is of the requisite value under Section 110 of the Civil Procedure Code is not disputed. The High Courts decision being an affirming one, the only point that arises is, whether the proposed appeal involves some substantial question of law. The finding here was reached, as already stated, upon a construction of the inam papers and no question of law was raised:

Where the question to be decided is one of fact, it does not involve any issue of law merely because documents, which were not instruments of title-or otherwise the direct foundations of rights, but were really historical materials, have to be c