IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU C.R.P. No.3190 of 2009 Date:27.09.2010 Between: Sri Bhamidipativari Choultry .....Petitioner AND Dasri Sanyasi Naidu and 2 others. ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU C.R.P. No.3190 of 2009 ORDER: 1. This petition is directed against the decree and judgment dated 05.03.2009 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Chodavaram, Visakhapatnam District in O.S.No.28 of 2006 whereunder and whereby the trial court decreed the suit holding that the court is having jurisdiction to try the suit. 2. Heard both sides. 3. Order XIV Rule 2(2) of C.P.C reads as follows: “(2) Where issues both of law and of fact arise in the same suit, and the Court is of opinion that the case or any part thereof may be disposed of on an issue of law only, it may try that issue first if that issue relates to- (a) the jurisdiction of the Court; or (b) a bar to the suit created by any law for the time being in force, and for the purpose may, if it thinks fit, postpone the settlement of the other issues until after that issue has been determined, and may deal with the suit in accordance with the decision on that issue.” 4. Counsel appearing for the appellant contended that under Section 87(1)( C ) of A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act (for short, Act 30/87) the Endowment Tribunal has jurisdiction to enquire into and decide any dispute as to the question whether any property is an endowment, if so whether it is a charitable endowment or religious endowment. There can not be any dispute that a preliminary issue with regard to the point of jurisdiction or bars a suit created by any law, has to be decided at the first instance. There is clear bar under Section 151 of Act, 30/87 for any court of law to entertain a suit if it comes under Section 87 of the Act. When preliminary issue is framed, parties be permitted to let in evidence. 5. As seen from the impugned order, no evidence was let in on behalf of both sides to decide as to whether the property in question is endowment property or not. Without adducing any evidence, the impugned order dated 05.03.2009 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Chodavaram, Visakhapatnam District in O.S.No.28 of 2006 is unsustainable. Hence, the matter is remanded to the trial court for fresh disposal in accordance with law and to decide and try the preliminary issue with regard to the maintainability of the suit, after giving due opportunity to both parties to adduce evidence. 6. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J September 27, 2010 GK/MD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU C.R.P. No.3190 of 2009 September 27, 2010