MARKANDEY KATJU, T.S.THAKUR
SYED MOHIDEEN – Appellant
Versus
RAMANATHAPURA PERIA MOGALLAM JAMATH – Respondent
ORDER
The application for substitution is allowed.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
This appeal has been filed against the impugned order of the High Court of Judicature at Madras dated 24th January, 2002 passed in C.R.P. No.1430 of 2001. The facts in detail have been set out in the impugned order and hence we are not repeating the same here. Having gone through the impugned order, we noticed from paragraphs 20 & 21 of the impugned order that the High Court has only observed that certain points were not considered by the Wakf Tribunal which should have been taken into consideration. Hence, the High Court remanded the matter. We agree with the aforesaid observations of the High Court and see no reason to interfere with the same. We, however, may make it clear that in terms of Section 83(5) of the Wakf Act, 1995 the Wakf Tribunal is deemed to be a civil court and has the same powers as are exercised by civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 while trying a suit or executing a decree or order. The civil courts are in turn competent to issue injunctions in terms of Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 and Section 151 C.P.C. Similar orders can, therefore, be passed by the Wakf Tribu
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.