Judgment :- GOKULAKRISHNAN, J. 1. Sri Subramaniaswami Devastanam, Tirupparankundram, is the appellant in this case. The dispute is with respect to the grant of a ryotwari patta in respect of a land measuring 1. 84 acres in Thirupparankundram village situate in S. No. 217/4. The appellant contends that the grant is in favour of the temple, this being a Divadiyam grant and as suoh patta has to be granted in favour of the temple. Respondents 1 to 7 claim right under Ex. A9 and A10 being the sale deeds of the year 1962, executed by one, Somasundaram Pillai. This Somasuadarm Pillai gets the right for 87-1/2 cents under Ex. A1. The other portion of the property, Somasundaram Pillai gets by way of succession, he being the son of the Thirunavukekarasu. Hence, respondents 1 to 7 want patta under S. 8(2) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1963 (Tamil Nadu Act 30 of 1963) (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Settlement Tahsildar granted patta for this extent of 1 acre 84 cents in S.F. No. 217/4 under S. 8(1) of the Act. On appeal by the appellant herein, the Inam Abolition Tribunal, Madurai, confirmed the order of the Settlement Tahsildar, by rejecting the claim of the appellant for grant of the patta under S. 8(2)(ii) of the Act. It is as against these orders, the present appeal has been filed. 2. Mr. V. Srinivasan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, submitted that the grant is in favour of the temple and not a personal inam grant burdended with service, and as such patta has to be granted in favour of the temple. The second contention raised by Mr. Srinivasan is that the sales under Exs. A9 and A10 in favour of the respondents being subsequent to 1-4-1960, the respondents cannot invoke the provision under S. 8(2)(i) for grant of patta. His next contention is that even assuming that this is a personal inam grant burdened with service, property is inalienable and as such patta connote be granted in favour of the respondents, but has to be granted in favour of the temple at least under S. 8(2)(ii) of the Act. Mr. Srinivasan also contended that the respondents being the assignees from Somasundaram Pillai should prove their possession for the period mentioned in S. 8 (2)(i)(b) to get patta under these provisions of the Act. Mr. Srinivasan also contended that the respondents being the assignees from Somasundaram Pillai should prove their possession for the period mentioned in S. 8 (2)(i)(b) to get patta under these provisions of the Act. 3. Mr. T.R. Mani, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, countered all these arguments stating that the respondents are entitled to get patta in respect of 87-1/2 cents under S. 8(2)(i)(b), and for the balance the matter has to be remanded to the file of the Settlement Tahsildar to ascertain the personal cultivation of the respondents in order to get ryotwari patta under S. 9(1)(ii) of the Act. 4. We have been taken through the relevant documents and evidence in this case. The grant is called the ‘Karuvoolam Madurai Service Grant”. This is for rendering service to protect the jewels of the Thirupparankundaram temple. We have carefully gone through Ex. B1, which is an extract from the Inim Fair register and Ex. B2 which is a certified copy of the extract of the inam settlement in respect of T.D. 1112. In column 8 of Ex. B1, it has been specifically stated that the grant is for the service of securing the‘Karuvoolam’ or the jewels of the Pagoda of Thiruparankundram Subramaniaswami. We take it that ‘Karuvoolam’ mentioned in this document really means the ‘Karuvoolam’, viz, the treasury of the temple. Columns 19, 20 and 21 also make it clear that it is a personal grant burdened with service. The evidence of P.W. 1 the vendor of the respondents coupled with Exs. B1 and B2, clearly establishes that this is a personal inam grant burdened with service and we have absolutely no hesitation to confirm the finding of the authories below that it is a personal grant burdened with service. 5. Before dealing with the other contentions raised by Mr. V. Srinivasan, we can usefully deal with the law on the subject with reference to the relevant provisions of Act 30 of 1963 6. S. 8(2), Cl. (i) and (ii) reads and follows— “Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-S. (1), in the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act. 1959 (Madras Act 22 of 1959), and in the Madras (Transferred Territory) Incorporated and Unincorporated Devaswoms Act, 1953 (Madras Act 30 of 1959). S. 8(2), Cl. (i) and (ii) reads and follows— “Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-S. (1), in the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act. 1959 (Madras Act 22 of 1959), and in the Madras (Transferred Territory) Incorporated and Unincorporated Devaswoms Act, 1953 (Madras Act 30 of 1959). the following provisions shall apply in the case of lands in an iruvaram minor inam granted for the support or maintenance of a religious institution or for the performance of a charity or service connected therewith or of any other religious charity— (i) where the land has been transferred by way of sale and the transferor or his heir, assignee, legal representative or person deriving rights through him had been in exclusive possession of such land— (a) for a continuous period of sixty years immediately before the 1st day of April, 1960, such person shall, with effect and from the appointed day be entailed to a ryotwari patta in respect of that land; (b) for a continuous period of twelve years immediately before the 1st day of April, 1960, such person shall, with effect on and from the appointed day, be entitled to a ryotwari patta if he pays as consideration to the Government in such manner and in such number of instalments as may be prescribed an amount equal to twenty times the difference between the fair rent in respect of such land determined in accordance with the provisions contained in the schedule and the land revenue due on such land; (ii) in the case of any other land, the institution or the individual rendering service shall, with effect on and from the appointed day, be entitled to a ryotwari patta in respect of that land. Explanation:— For the purposes of this sub section ‘land revenue’ means the ryotwari assessment including the additional assessment, water cess and additional water cess.” S. 3, Cl. (c) of the Act states— “With effect on and from the appointed day and save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act— (a) .. (b) (c) all rights and interests created by the inamdar in or over his inam before the appointed day, shall, as against the Government, cease and determine”. 7. There is absolutely no difficulty in coming to the conclusion that the appointed day is 15th February, 1965 and the same is clear from the notification which has been produced before us. (b) (c) all rights and interests created by the inamdar in or over his inam before the appointed day, shall, as against the Government, cease and determine”. 7. There is absolutely no difficulty in coming to the conclusion that the appointed day is 15th February, 1965 and the same is clear from the notification which has been produced before us. If that be so, the sale deeds, Ex. A9 and A10 which are of the year 1962, are definitely before the appointed day. The transferee or his heir, assignee, legal representative, etc., occurring in S. 8(2)(i) will take in the predecessors-in-interest, of the property concerned. If that be so, the respondents can tack on their possession to that of their predecessor, who is Somasundaram Pillai in this case, and his right, as far as the extent of 871/2 cents is concerned, accrues under Ex. A1, dated 19th February, 1947. This is definitely 12 years before the 1st day of April, 1960. If that be so the claim of the respondents for patta will squarely come under S. 8 (2)(i)(b), of the Act. S. 8(2)(i) (b), as we have referred to already, contemplated the liability of a person to pay certain consideration to the Government. Mr. T.R. Mani fairly states that the authorities below ought to have granted patta for this 87-1/2 cents only under S. 8(2)(i)(b) of the Act and that the respondents have to pay the consideration as contemplated under S. 8(2)(i)(b). For this purpose alone, the matter has to be remanded to the file of the Settlement Tahsildar for the purpose of ascertaining the consideration to be paid to the Government and the patta can be granted subject to the condition of paying the consideration that will be decided by the Settlement Tahsildar. In this connection we state that the patta granted by the authorities below for this 87-1/2 cents under S. 8(2) is not correct. 8. Mr. Srinivasan contended that the inam land is inalienable being a personal inam grant burdened with service. We are not able to appreciate this argument, when we are considering the grant of patta under S. 8(1) of the Act. It is only for such cases of alienation, the Act provides the machinery for grant of patta, to the persons contemplated under: S. 1(2)(a)(i)(a) or (b). We are not able to appreciate this argument, when we are considering the grant of patta under S. 8(1) of the Act. It is only for such cases of alienation, the Act provides the machinery for grant of patta, to the persons contemplated under: S. 1(2)(a)(i)(a) or (b). We have already discussed as to how the respondents come within the provision of S. 8(2)(i)(b) for grant of patta in respect of thi s 87 cents of land which they have acquired through Ex. A9 and A10. 9. As regards the balance of the land involved in this case, Mr. T.R. Mani, fairly concedes that it will not come either under S. 8(2)(i) Cl. (a) or Cl. (b). This is because of the fact that the vendor under Ex. A9 and A10, got only 87 cents under Ex. A1, dated 19th February, 1947. With regard to the balance, which is 96 cents, the grant of ryotwari patta has to be considered only under S. 9(1)(ii) of the Act. S. 9(1)(ii) of the Act reads: “Subject to the provisions of the next succeeding section, where in respect of an inam land no person is entitled to a ryotwari patta under S. 8, and the land vests in the Government, the persons specified below shall be entitled to ryotwari patta in respect of that land in the following order of preference— (i) firstly— (ii) secondly, if there is ho such person as is referred to in Cl. (i) then, a person who had been lawfully admitted into possession of such land on or after thd 27th day of September, 1955, and who had been personally cultivating such land ever since ..” As far as this 96 cents of the land is concerned, the same is covered, along with he 87 cents of land, under Ex. A9 and A10, which are all sale deeds in favour of the respondent executed by Somasundaram Pillai. Somasundaiam Pillai as P.W. 1, has no objection to the grant of patta in favour of the respondents herein. Admittedly, the respondents have come into possession of the land subsequent to 1955. For this 96 cents, the 12 years period contemplated under S. 8(2)(i)(b) is not available since under Ex. A1, dt. 19th February, 1947 this portion is not covered. Somasundaiam Pillai as P.W. 1, has no objection to the grant of patta in favour of the respondents herein. Admittedly, the respondents have come into possession of the land subsequent to 1955. For this 96 cents, the 12 years period contemplated under S. 8(2)(i)(b) is not available since under Ex. A1, dt. 19th February, 1947 this portion is not covered. In as much as the respondents come into possession of this 9 cents subsequent to 1955, S. 9(1)(ii) alone will apply for grant of patta to the respondents and if that be so, there must be a finding as to whether the respondents have personally cultivated such land as and from the date of their purchase. We do not have any such finding to this effect. Hence, the grant of patta in respect of this 961 cents by the authorities below has to be set aside and the matter has to be remanded to the Settlement Tahsildar for the grant of patta as provided under S. 9(1)(ii) of the Act. 10. For all thee reasons, the appeal is allowed, in terms indicated above, and the matter is remanded to the file of the Settlement Tahsildar for the purpose of granting the ryotwari patta both in respect of 87 cents and the 9 cents of land in accordance with the observations we have made in the above paragraphs. There will be no order as to costs.