JUDGMENT : BURKITT, J. 1. This is an appeal from a decision of the Subordinate Judge of Aligarh, affirming the decision of the Munsif of Kasganj. The suit is one to obtain a declaration that a certain grove standing in the field No. 483 is the ex-proprietary holding of the plaintiff, and as such, it is not liable to be sold in execution of a decree against the plaintiff. The facts are as follows:— One, Musammat Dal Kuar, held a simple money decree against the plaintiff Zahur Ali Khan. In execution of that decree she attached, among other property, the grove number 483, mentioned above, and of course attached it as being the absolute property of Zahur Ali Khan. Zahur Ali Khan objected to the attachment and sale of this grove, on the ground that it appertained to his ex-proprietary tenure and, therefore, under section 9 of the N.W.P. Rent Act, was not liable to attachment and sale in execution of any decree. On the 4th of November, 1897, the Subordinate Judge decided that the field No. 483 did not appertain to the plaintiff's ex-proprietary holding and was, therefore, liable to sale. An appeal was instituted by Zahur Ali Khan but before the appeal could be heard, the grove was sold under the order, dated 27th November, 1897, and was purchased by one Khiali Ram, the appellant here. Subsequently the appeal of Zahur Ali Khan, mentioned above, came on for hearing and the result was that the District Judge reversed the decision of the Subordinate Judge and remanded the case for retrial on merits. Subsequently in November, 1899, another Subordinate Judge decided that this grove was part of the ex-proprietary holding of Zahur Ali Khan. Meanwhile the auction-purchaser, Khiali Ram had got symbolical, but not actual, possession of the grove. 2. The present suit, as mentioned above, was instituted by Zahur Ali Khan to obtain a declaration to the effect that Khiali Ram took nothing by his purchase. Both the lower Courts have agreed in deciding against the purchaser Khiali Ram. Hence this appeal. It is contended that the case is governed by the decisions of their Lordships of the Privy Council in the case of Zain-ul-Abdin v. Mohammad Asghar Ali Khan, [1887] I.L.R., 10 All, 166. In our opinion that case is not in any way in point. Hence this appeal. It is contended that the case is governed by the decisions of their Lordships of the Privy Council in the case of Zain-ul-Abdin v. Mohammad Asghar Ali Khan, [1887] I.L.R., 10 All, 166. In our opinion that case is not in any way in point. Here, what is to be decided, simply is this, what was it that the defendant Khiali Ram purchased in execution of Dal Kuar's decree (dated the 22nd of November, 1897)? It has now been decided, and there can be no possible doubt on the point, that at the time when the appellant's purchase took place, Zahur Ali Khan was not the absolute proprietor of the grove, that his interest in it was confined to that of an ex-proprietary tenant. It follows, therefore, under section 9 of the Rent Act, that when Khiali Ram purchased the interest of Zahur Ali Khan at the auction he in fact purchased the interest of an ex-proprietary tenant, an interest which the law forbids to be sold. He therefore, took nothing by this purchase. The Judgment of the Privy Council in I.L.R., 10 Allahabad, mentionedx above is very different. In that case the question was not, what was the interest which was sold but the question was, whether the sale, having duly taken place, could or could not be set aside on the ground that on further proceeding the decree had been reversed by an appellate Court. There was no question in that case as to what interest was held by the judgment-debtor in the property sold. Here the only thing to be decided is what interest did Zahur Ali Khan possess in this grove. The interest had been found by the two lower Courts to be that of an ex-proprietary tenant. That is an interest which cannot be the subject of a sale in execution. Therefore, affirming the judgments of the lower Courts we direct that this appeal be dismissed with costs including fees on the higher scale.