- (1.) THE facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows:
(2.) THE disputed property was part of a Waqf property. Srnt. Hamida and Smt. Zubaida were the mutwallis of the Waqf. They executed a permanent lease in favour of Shafiuddin, the husband of Smt. Hamida about ten and half kattas of Waqf land. Shafiuddin built a Kachcha construction on the part of the land which was leased out to him. That land has been shown in the map of the Amin by letters YZBA. The plaintiffs purchased this land from Shafiuddin. The defendant is also said to have purchased this land. There was a dispute between the defen dant and the plaintiffs about the possession of the land which resulted in a proceeding under Section 145, Cr. P. C. and it was decided in favour of the defendant. The plaintiffs then brought a suit. The defendant contested the suit alleging that the land belonged to him and he was the original" owner of the same. He also contended that the mutvvallis had no right to lease out the Waqf property and, as such, no right and interest was created in favour of Shafiuddin nor Shafi uddin had any power to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs.
(3.) THE learned Munsif held that the land which the defendant No. 1 pur chased was a land other than the dis puted land. He also held that the disput ed land was the same which was leased out to Shafiuddin and it was sold by Shafi uddin to the plaintiffs, but dismissed the suit on the finding that the mutwallis Smt. Zubaida and Smt. Hamida had no power to execute a permanent lease in favour of Shafiuddin and, therefore, the plaintiffs had no right, title and interest in the disputed land.;