JUDGMENT : 1. This case appears to me to be on all fours with the case of Abdul Aziz v. Chairman of the Municipal Board of Pilibhit , [1905] 2 A.L.J. 222 : (1905) A.W.N. 79., by the decision in which I am bound. According to that case the suit ought to have been dismissed altogether. The Munsif has added a proviso to his decree to which the Municipal Board has taken no objection. The suggestion that the Board was not entitled to close the drain because the plaintiff had obtained a decree declaring his right to pass water along a drain through the defendant's house, and that this right is saved by Section 2 of the Municipalities Act, cannot be accepted. It is impossible to read S. 2 in such a way as to prevent the Municipal Board from exercising for all time the powers conferred by S. 91 of the Act in respect of drains which are a nuisance or are injurious to health. 2. The contention raised in the second ground of appeal has no weight. It must be presumed that the Board acted honestly in exercising the powers conferred on it, and it does not signify whether the Board was moved to act by defendant 2 or by anyone else. 3. In the fourth ground of appeal it is said that the plaintiff-appellant may be put to considerable expense. 4. That is a matter which does not arise in the present case, nor can I express any opinion on the question whether the Board is bound to give compensation to him or not. In my opinion the decision of the lower appellate Court is correct. The appeal therefore fails and is dismissed with two separate sets of costs.