1. This suit was brought by a male reversioner to the estate of the founder of a trust for the temple of Alagia Singaperumal Kadavul to recover property alienated in favour of 1st defendant by the act of the founders wife, who is 2nd defendant. The District Munsif held that the plaintiff was not entitled to maintain the suit and dismissed it. The Additional Subordinate Judge was of a contrary opinion and ordered the suit to go on.

2. He relied on two cases, Cunniah Chetty v. T. Ramanuja-chari (1913) 24 M.L.J. 48 and Srinivasacharlu v. Subuddhi (1888) 23 M.L.J. 348. Both of these decisions were given in suits instituted when the Civil Procedure Code of 1882 was in force. When the amended Act of 1908 came into force it contained a new provision in Clause 2 of Section 92 barring suits in respect of charitable and religious trusts without first obtaining the permission of the Advocate-General.

3. We have been referred, in the course of the arguments, to two other cases, Subramania Aiyar v. Nagarathna Naicker (1909) 20 M.L.J. 151 and Rangaswami Naidu v. Krishnaswami Aiyar (1922) 44 M.L.J. 116. These were cases in which a number of persons had a common interest in a temple or chari