(1.) The dispute in this case relates to a tank.
(2.) The appellants before us claim to have purchased it as part of Howla Hurai Shaik; the defendants, on the other hand, claim it as part of Howla Golam Nabi.
(3.) The Court of first instance held that the tank belonged to both the howlas and accordingly gave a decree to the plaintiff in respect of an eight-annas share. Both parties appealed and the learned Subordinate Judge on appeal same to the conclusion that the plaintiff had failed to make out his right to the disputed tank and dismissed the suit entirely. The plaintiffs have preferred an appeal to this Court.