1. Appellants brought this suit to recover 2-15-0 kanis of Inam land together with Rs. 75 for loss of produce for the year Iswara (1878-79). They alleged that the first and second respondents had granted to them a lease on the 27th April 1879 for a term of nine years, and that the third to sixth respondents, who had previously been in possession, refused to surrender the land and enjoyed the produce in the year Iswara, which, it was stated, amounted to 30 kalams. The seventh respondent was exonerated from all responsibility, and the first and second respondents, who are the Inamdars, admitted the lease and the appellants' claim. The other respondents contended that they were in possession under one Muniyappa Udayan who had reclaimed the land, and that the appellants' lessors were entitled only to a tirva of Rs. 8 per annum. The District Judge dismissed the suit on the ground that the 'Pensions Act barred its institution in the Civil Courts. In the title-deed granted to the first and second respondents and three others' by the Inam Commissioner, the Inam is described to be a religious endowment or Matam Service Inam held for the support of their family and of a matam, and confirmed to them and their successors, tax free, to be held without interference so long as the conditions of the grant were fulfilled.
2. We must, therefore, regard the grant not as a personal grant but as one primarily intended for the maintenance of a religious endowment, although beneficial to the family by whom the endowment is administered.
3. In the case of The Secretary of State for India v. Abdul Hakkim Khan I.L.R. 2 Mad. 294 it was decided that the provisions of the Pensions Act, 1871, were not applicable to endowments of this kind; and that decision was followed in appeal 126 of 1881 (not reported).
4. We must, therefore, reverse the decree of the District Judge and remand the appeal for adjudication on the merits.
5. The costs will abide and follow the result.