1. This is defendants' appeal. The facts briefly appear to be that the Raja of Jaunpur, who is zamindar of the lands which form the subject matter of this appeal, recently gave a lease of them to the plaintiff. The plaintiff proceeded to reclaim those lands and bring them into cultivation, when he was obstructed by some of the residents, tenants and others, in the village, who claim a right of pasture over the said lands. The first Court dismissed the claim, the second gave plaintiff a decree for possession, but without damages. In appeal it is urged that, under the terms of the wajib-ul-arz, the defendants had acquired a permanent and perpetual title to pasture their cattle on the lands in dispute. The Lower Appellate Court has come to the conclusion that the wajib-ul-arz did not grant any such right. The words in the wajib-ul-arz go no further than to provide that the village cattle may graze on waste land in the same manner as they were in the habit of grazing at the time of the preparation of the wajib-ul-arz. But that document contains no undertaking or covenant by the zamindar owner of the village not to reclaim or bring under cultivation any land which then was waste land. That, however, is what the defendants appellants ask by this appeal. They practically say that the owner of the village has no power to bring under cultivation any land which was waste land when the wajib-ul-arz was prepared. I can find no support for that contention in the wajib-ul-arz. It does no more than give effect to the almost universal custom of these Provinces, which permits village cattle to graze on waste land; but to go further, and to hold that that permission takes away from the zamindar the power to reclaim waste land is a serious inroad on the proprietary rights of the zamindar for which I know of no authority. I dismiss this appeal with costs.