SIFAT ALI KHAN Vs. ALI MIAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit for a declaration that the plaintiffs are the mutwallis and Imams of a certain mosque situated in Shahjahanpur City, and they have for more than 25 years been saying namaz as members of the Ahmadya community, and that the defendants and all other non-Ahmadis have on no account any right to offer their prayers in congregation led by some other Imam. The second relief was that a perpetual injunction be issued to the defendants and all other non-Ahmadis restraining them from doing any act which might cause interfunction in the offering of prayers and in the performance of other religious functions while the plaintiffs and others of their faith are saying namaz in the mosque. It appears that the mosque in suit was built long before the Ahmadya sect was founded. The sect was founded by one Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian in the Punjab about the year 1888. He proclaimed himself a Prophet and a sect of his followers was founded. The plaintiffs in the present suit used to be orthodox Sunni Mahomedan but it appears that about 25 or 30 years ago they became followers of the Ahmadya sect. Their case was that they had all along been leading prayers in this mosque and that other Mahomedans who did not adopt the tenets of the Ahmedya sect had ceased to come and so the mosque had practically been frequented only by members of the Ahmadya sect. Recently certain of the Sunnis had created disturbances when the plaintiffs were leading prayers according to their ritual.

(2.) The learned Munsif found that the plaintiffs had failed to prove that they were ever mutwallis of the mosque; he further found that they failed to prove that plaintiff 1 had ever any legal right to officiate as an Imam. It appears that the plaintiff 1 had officiated as Imam on certain occasions but he was not the exclusive Imam and the congregation used to choose any of the members present to lead the prayers. In any case, the plaintiff had not established any exclusive right to lead the prayers as Imam. It was also found that the plaintiffs have failed to prove any legal right to compel the contesting defendants not to offer prayers behind anyone who not a member of the Ahmadya sect.

(3.) On these findings the trial Court dismissed the plaintiffs suit. The plaintiffs appealed and the learned District Judge while upholding the findings of the trial Court has granted the plaintiffs an injunction restraining the defendants and all other non-Ahmadis from saying or doing anything which may cause interruption in the performance of namaz and other religious functions by the plaintiff-appellants and other Ahmadis while they are present in the mosque for the purpose of the said performance. The defendants come to this Court in second appeal and urge that the Court below was wrong in granting to the plaintiffs the injunction specified.