Life of Ahmad — Page 715
as THE WALL 715 certainly the way used by both parties, people who came to see the parties also passed by the same way. Most of the witnesses of the plaintiff are his followers and admirers, but apart from them there are other witnesses also who are reliable, while the witnesses of the defendant are not so reliable. Anyhow, there is no doubt that the parties and those who visited them passed through the way, now blocked by the wall, without let or hindrance. Hence, I determine that the land on which the wall has been erected was the way used by the plaintiff: for the last 15 years it has also been used by the public. I also find that the land under dispute belongs not only to the defendants but to both the parties. . . The plaintiff possesses the right of way on the land under dispute. Therefore he is entitled to get a permanent injunction as he claims. It is ordered, therefore, that a permanent injunction be issued to defendants No. 1 and No. 2 not to block the way at any point and to demolish the wall so that the way be opened. If the defendants do not demolish the wall themselves it shall be demolished. The defendants should pay Rs. 100 as damages 169 to the plaintiff. . . ' 169 The representatives of Ahmad as pressed Imam Din and Nizam Din for the payment of Rs. 144-5-7 (costs and damages) in execution of the decree of the court. The defendants tried to evade it till a warrant was issued on August 31st, 1904, for the attachment of their Kharas etc. Imam Din had