The inam was a personal service inam granted to an individual for the purpose of performing certain rites and ceremonies in a mosque. The claim that the inam lands were the property of the mosque was an afterthought. The suit was barred by limitation.

Ramesam, J.

1. This appeal arises out of a suit by two members of the Muhammadan community (i) for a declaration that the resumption of the suit inam by the Government and conversion into a ryotwari land is not binding on the plaintiffs and other Muhammadan members of the community: and (2) for a declaration that the two mortgages, dated 16th March 1914, which were executed in favour of defendant 2, by defendants 3 to 7 and grandmother of the 8th are in" valid and cannot bind the suit property. Defendant 1 is the Secretary of State for India in Council and defendant 2 is the mortgagee.

2. The history of the suit inam may now be briefly stated. The earliest document we have got on record is an extract from Oakes Inam Register, Ex. X prepared in 1797. This was a register of inams probably prepared with a view to the passing of Regulation 31 of 1802, but, whatever it may be, it describes the suit land merely as an inam, fixes a certain amount of kattubadi in kind on it and shows that the inam was granted by one Mustapha Khollikanudu, probably a representative of the Moghul sovereigns. The date of the grant was Hijri 1108. The grantee is described as Sheik Ibrahim and the person in enjoyment in 1797 as-great-grand son, Gulam Hussain. The next document on record is Ex. A. This is the inam register of the village of Gandram. The suit inam is situated in the village of Ibrahimpalem which is a hamlet of Gandram. Col. 2 describes the grant as endowment to a religious institution. Col. 8 is:

Devadayam granted for the performance of certain rites in the mosque. The ceremonies are duly kept up.

3. Col. 9 shows that the annual kattubadi changed to Rs. 32 from 1852. Col. 10 describes the inam as hereditary. Col. 11 shows that the grant was made in Hijri 1137 or A. D. 1724 by Sidni Etida. Khan of Mahomed Shah Gazhi Padshah. Mahomed Shah is probably the Emperor of Delhi who reigned from 1719 to 1748 and the other person is his local representative. In Col. 12 there is a list of documents. The first is the sanad granted by Etida Khan in Hijri 1137 (A. D. 1724). The third is sanad granted by Kuli Khan mentioned in the Oakes Register. The second is another sanad in Persian. The others-are dumbalas and checknamas, i. e., orders-addressed to village officials. Col. 15 refers to the accounts of 1797, i. e., the Oakes Register. Cols. 16 to 18 describe the person in enjoyment in 1859 as Haji Sahib of Nagaram, the fifth in, descent from the original grantee. Cols. 19 and 20 give the details of his family. Col. 21 is the recommendation of the Special Assistant. It says:

This inam is an ancient one having been granted in H. 1137 or A. D. 1124 for the purpose of keeping up certain ceremonies in the mosque of Gandram. The original sanad was given to Mulla Sheik Ibrahim, in whose family the inam has all along been enjoyed and the rites fully performed.... It is recommended that the inam be continued for the?purpose originally contemplated subject to the payment of the annual kattubdi of thirty-two rupees (Rs. 32).

4. Col. 22 is the order of the Inam Commissioner "continued accordingly." In 1874 Hajis son Dada Sahib granted a cowle of the inam for a period of 22 years to Mirza Mahomed Taki Sahib. That cowle was transferred to one Tadu Sahib in 1884. In 1886 that cowle right was surrendered by him for a sum of Rs. 1,746. For this and some other item of consideration the inam was mortgaged for Rs. 1,926 on 16th July 1886 to the said Thadu Sahib under Ex. 4. Ex. 4-a is the surrender of the cowle right. Ex. 5 is a deed of mortgage with possession dated 23rd August 1888 to the same Thadu Sahib. This mortgage right was transferred by Ex. 5-a to one Meerza Sahib. It also shows that the title-deeds were with a sowcar. Exs. 9-a, 9-b, and 9-d are muchilikas obtained by Shafi, son of Mirza. Ex. 6 is a sub-mortgage by Shafi dated 28th June 1894 in favour of one V. Venkataramayya, husband of defendant 2. Ex. 9-c is a muchilika taken by him soon after. Ex. 9 is another