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

1947 Supreme(SC) 51

Privy Council At Allahabad
Justice Lord Simonds, J.
Mazhar Husain and others -Appellant
Versus
Rao Bahadur Adiya Saran Singh -Resopndent
Privy Council Appeal No. 59 of 1944
Decided On : 24-07-1947

Advocates Appeared:
T.L. Wilson and Co., Dold, Douglas Grant, H.J. Umrigar, S.P. Khambatta, A.G.P. Pullan

A lawful and effective creation of a wakf is consistent with all the proved facts; and in their Lordships' view is the proper and reasonable inference from those facts.

Headnote:

WAKF - CREATION - EVIDENCE - INFERENCE FROM FACTS - ADMISSIONS AND ASSERTIONS OF PREDECESSORS - IN - TITLE - WEIGHT - PROPER INFERENCE - DEDICATION OF VILLAGES AS ENDOWMENT - ENFORCEABLE DIRECTIONS - OVERT EXPRESSIONS OF INTENTION - LAWFUL AND EFFECTIVE CREATION OF WAKF.

Fact of the Case:

The appellants claimed the removal of the respondent from the trusteeship of certain properties alleged to be wakf properties and consequential relief. The respondent denied that any wakf was ever created. The only question at issue in the appeal was whether the subject of the wakf was, as found by the High Court, a mosque only or was, as found by the District Judge, a mosque, a grove and imambara and two villages endowed for the upkeep of the mosque, grove and imambara.

Finding of the Court:

The High Court found that the subject of the wakf was a mosque only, while the District Judge found that it was a mosque, a grove and imambara and two villages endowed for the upkeep of the mosque, grove and imambara.

Issues: Whether the subject of the wakf was a mosque only or was a mosque, a grove and imambara and two villages endowed for the upkeep of the mosque, grove and imambara.

Ratio Decidendi: The proper inference from the history of the matter, the dealings with the properties, the litigation that has affected it and the admissions and assertions made by the respondent's predecessors - in - title is that Haidar Bakhsh purchased the villages in the names of Maiku Lal and Bahadur Lal on the expressed footing that they were to be an endowment of an existing wakf consisting of the mosque, grove and imambara, their Lordships do not doubt that all the requirements of Shia law necessary to the valid creation of a wakf attaching to the villages were satisfied.

Final Decision: The appeal was allowed and the judgment of the District Judge was restored. The respondent was ordered to pay the costs of the proceedings in the High Court and of the appeal.

Lord Uthwatt. -

This is an appeal from a judgment and decree of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated 8 - 9 - 1941, reversing in part a judgment and decree of the District Judge of Cawnpore dated 4 - 10 - 1934.

2. The appellants were the plaintiffs in the suit giving rise to this appeal. In it they claimed the removal of the respondent, defendant in the suit, from the trusteeship of certain properties alleged to be wakf properties and consequential relief. The respondent denied that any wakf was ever created. The only question at issue in the appeal is whether the subject of the wakf was, as found by the High Court, a mosque only or was, as found by the District Judge, a mosque, a grove and imambara and two villages endowed for the upkeep of the mosque, grove and imambara. The appellants' case is that a wakf extending to all these properties was created by Haidar Bakhsh. The following pedigree shows the relation between the persons who figure in the history of the matter :

3. Haidar Bakhsh - reputedly a very wealthy man - belonged to a Hindu family but some time prior to 1794 A.D. embraced Islam, remaining nevertheless on good terms with his brother and his brother's descendants. Sometime about 1813 A. D. Haidar Bakhsh built a mosque and imambara and planted a grove known as Imam Bagh. These were in a compound containing residential houses in one of which Haidar Bakhsh lived. The appellants' case is that thenceforward the mosque was used for worship and the imambara for the burial of "Tazias" at the Moharram and for other purposes connected with the Mahomedan religion.

4. In 1834 the two villages in question - Charli and Jafarpur Sathra - were bought in the name of Maiku Lal, grand - nephew of Haidar Bakhsh, and Lal Bahadur, great - grand - nephew of Haidar Bakhsh, their respective fathers being then living. The names of Maiku Lal and Bahadur Lal were mutated in the village papers as proprietors. Haidar Bakhsh had no Mahomedan heirs. The appellants' case is that this purchase was made by Haidar Bakhsh "benami" to ensure the perpetuity of the wakf consisting of the mosque, grove and imambara. Haidar Bakhsh died in 1837/1838 A. D.

5. There is no evidence that Haidar Bakhsh ever executed a wakfnama and no direct evidence of any oral dedication by him. But if the proper inference from the history of the matter, the dealings with the properties, the litigation that has affected it and the admissions and assertions made by the respondent's predecessors - in - title is that Haidar Bakhsh purchased the villages in the names of Maiku Lal and Bahadur Lal on the expressed footing that they were to be an endowment of an existing wakf consisting of the mosque, grove and imambara, their Lordships do not doubt that all the requirements of Shia law necessary to the valid creation of a wakf attaching to the villages were satisfied.

6. The matter to be determined is merely one of the proper inference to be drawn from facts none of which is now in dispute. In the principles to be applied and the method of approach to be followed their Lordships are in agreement with the High Court. They differ from the High Court as to the conclusion which ought to be drawn from the material proved in the case. The elaborate and careful statement of the facts contained in the judgment of the District Judge and the High Court relieves their Lordships from the need of stating much of the detail.

7. Three important matters may be summarily disposed of. First, their Lordships are satisfied that the villages were purchased by Haidar Bakhsh. That was admitted by counsel for Iqbal Bahadur in a suit in 1875 and the admission accords with all the probabilities of the case. The District Judge found that the villages were so bought and his view was not in terms dissented from by the High Court. Second, the oral evidence established to the satisfaction of the District Judge that until recent years the imambara as well as the mosque was open to the public and was generall











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 Back to top