A declaratory judgment was sought with respect to a similar controversy in City of Summerville v. Georgia Power Co., 78 Ga. App. 666 (51 SE2d 702); certiorari denied 78 Ga. App. 898. There this court held that the mere possibility that the city might vote revenue certificates for the purpose of constructing and maintaining a system for distribution of electricity was not sufficient to constitute an actual controversy within the meaning of the statute (Ga. L. 1945, as amended, Code Ann. Ch. 110-11). In the present case, as the court observed in that case, if we suppose that the voters should elect not to issue bonds for the construction of an electric light and power plant, the declaration of the rights of the parties as prayed would be an advisory, academic, and useless declaration. Accord Liner v. City of Rossville, 212 Ga. 664 (94 SE2d 862). We know of no other case in which our courts have adjudicated the question of the necessity of declaratory relief when the facts and circumstances and asserted rights were like those alleged in this petition. Furthermore, "The object of the declaratory judgment is to permit determination of a controversy before obligations are repudiated or rights are violated." Pinkard v. Mendel, 216 Ga. 487, 490 (117 SE2d 336). "The petition shows that whatever rights the plaintiff has have already accrued." Scott v. Employees' Retirement System, 113 Ga. App. 295, 296 (147 SE2d 821).

The trial court erred in overruling the general demurrers to the petition.

Troutman, Sams, Schroder & Lockerman, William H. Schroder, Jr., Tench C. Coxe, Harold C. McKenzie, Jr., Milton A. Carlton, Jr., Rogers, Magruder & Hoyt, Jack Rogers, for appellant.