JUDGMENT Bodillt, J. - The case must proceed in spite of the preliminary objection. However I do not think that the point is entirely free from doubt, but I must follow, in my opinion, the principle laid clown by a large number of cases in the Bombay and the Allahabad Courts which have been cited to me and which deal with this section. The section is worded, as I said during the argument, in a very obscure manner, but it means, in my opinion, that there must be some dispute in existence of such a public nature that the intervention of the Advocate-General is necessary to decide if and by whom a suit should be brought to establish public rights. In this regard I follow the words of Mr. Justice Banerjee, reported in Sajedur Raja Chowdhuri v. Gour Mohan Das (1), which are as follows :-- " This condition was imposed to prevent an indefinite number of reckless and harassing suits being brought against trustees by different persons interested in the trust. Where this condition is fulfilled, and the risk of harassing suits being brought against trustees is thus guarded against, there is no reason why suits brought under the section should be restricted in any other way." 2. This dispute is merely one between two entirely private parties, each claiming to exercise rights, as matwallis over wakf property and it is not a dispute of such a public nature as to bring it, in my opinion, within see. 539 of the Civil Procedure Code, making it necessary that the sanction of the Advocate-General should be obtained. For these reasons I decide that the preliminary objection falls.