Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ASHOK BHUSHAN, K.M. JOSEPH, JJ.
Punjab Wakf Board – Appellant
Versus
Sham Singh Harike – Respondent
Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Civil Appeal No. 92 of 2019, Civil Appeal No. 93 of 2019
Decided On : 07-02-2019
Facts of Case:
Main issue which has arisen for consideration in these appeals is as to whether suit filed by appellant before Wakf Tribunal praying for decree of possession of suit property was maintainable in Wakf Tribunal or would lie only in a Civil Court. Although, Wakf Tribunal has held that suit was maintainable before it, High Court has reversed the order of Tribunal holding that suit is not maintainable before Wakf Tribunal.
Findings of Court:
Provision contained in proviso to Section 6(1) that no such suit shall be entertained by Tribunal after the expiry of one year from date of publication of list of Wakfs shall be applicable to every person who though not interested in Wakf concerned, is interested in such property and to whom a reasonable opportunity had been afforded to represent his case by notice served on him in that behalf during course of relevant inquiry under Section 4.
Result : Appeals Partly allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Ashok Bhushan, J.
These two appeals having been filed against two separate judgments of the Punjab and Haryana High Court allowing the Civil Revisions filed by the respondents have been heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.
2. Brief facts giving rise to the above appeals which are necessary to be noticed for deciding these appeals are:
Civil Appeal No.92 of 2019 (Punjab Wakf Board v. Sham Singh Harike)
The appellant, Pubjab Wakf Board, claimed to be owner of land measuring 269 kanals 7 marlas, comprising in khewat No.462, khatauni Nos.589, 593, 599 and 596 in khasra Nos.103, 105, 102 min, 104, 106, of village Birmi, Tehsil and District Ludhiana. The appellant had let out the above-mentioned land to Sham Singh and his wife Kuldeep Kaur for cultivation of the land. The lessee deposited the rent for few years and thereafter initiated litigation against the interest of the Board which was decided in favour of the Board. The appellant filed Civil Suit No.250 of 2001 in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division for the grant of permanent injunction restraining the respondents from raising any construction and changing the position from agricultural to residential of the property in any manner. The respondents filed written statement challenging the maintainability of the suit. The title of the appellant was denied in the written statement. After the constitution of the Wakf Tribunal, the suit was transferred to the Wakf Tribunal and renumbered as RBT No.84/2006. The respondent filed an application before the Tribunal for rejection of the plaint on the ground that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit and the Civil Court alone has jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The Wakf Tribunal by its order dated 17.04.2009 rejected the application of the respondent and held that after 01.01.1996 it is only the Wakf Tribunal which has jurisdiction to try the present suit.
3. The respondent aggrieved by the order dated 17.04.2009 filed Civil Revision in the High Court. The High Court relying on the judgment of Ramesh Gobindram(dead) through LRs. v. Sugra Humayun Mirza Wakf, (2010) 8 SCC 726, allowed the Revision. The High Court held that since the appellant is a nonmuslim, the Wakf Tribunal has no jurisdiction in the matter and it is only the Civil Court which had the jurisdiction in the present dispute. The appellant aggrieved by the said judgment dated 20.09.2010 has come up in this appeal.
Civil Appeal No.93 of 2019(Punjab Wakf Board v. Teja Singh)
4. The Punjab Wakf Board, the appellant claiming to be owner of the property measuring 29 Kanals 9 Marlas comprised in Khewat No.224, khatauni No.277, Khasra Nos.55, 56, 57 filed Suit No.2 of 2007 in the Court of Wakf Tribunal, Ludhiana for possession of above noted property and seeking relief for permanent injunction restraining the respondent from interfering and changing the nature of the property. Plaintiff's case in the suit was that the defendant, Taja Singh took suit property on yearly lease from Wakf Board till the year 1996-97 and paid lease money to the plaintiff Board. After 1996-97 lease was not renewed and defendant having committed certain illegalities, the Wakf Board cancelled the lease on 05.12.1998. Notice to this effect was served upon the defendant vide which a request was made to the defendant to handover the vacant possession of the leased-out property to the plaintiff Board. After cancellation of the lease, the possession of the defendant over the suit property became illegal.
5. The defendant had also filed suit for grant of injunction which was decreed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana, the Court restrained the Board from dispossessing the respondent forcibly and illegally except in due course of law. The defendant having failed to handover the possession, the appellant filed the suit for possession and the grant of permanent injunction. The defendant entered appearance and filed written statement. The defendant's case in t
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
