SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1985 Supreme(SC) 39

O.CHHINNAPPA REDDY, R.B.MISRA
Mohammad Ghouse Sahib – Appellant
Versus
Muhammad Kuthubudin Sahib – Respondent


Advocates:
A.T.M.SAMPATH, J.RAMA CHANDRA RAO, K.RAM KUMAR, K.RAM MOHAN

Judgment

CHINNAPPA REDDY, J. :- The defendants who had failed in a suit brought under section 92 C. P. C. are the appellants in this Appeal The appeal however is not against the decree passed in the suit under S. 92 C. P. C. but is directed against the order overruling the defendants! objections. in execution proceedings. The objection was that though the suit under S. 92 C. P.C. was filed before the passing of the Wakf Act the decree had been passed subsequent to the coming into force of the Act and was therefore, void. We see no force in the objection raised by the defendants. It is true that while the Wakf Act came into force in the State of Tamil Nadu in 1956, the decree framing the scheme for the Wakf was passed in 1961 but that does not render the decree void and unenforceable. As we said, this suit had been instituted prior to the coming into force of the Wakf Act. Section 55 of the Wakf Act shows that suits under S. 92 of C. P. C. continue to be maintainable even after the passing of the Act except that the consent of the Board has to be obtained for the institution of such a suit if the suit is filed by some person other than the Board Section 57(1) provides that in every s



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top