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

1978 Supreme(AP) 256

A.GANGADHARA RAO
R. Doraswamy Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Board of Wakf A. P. Hyderabad reptd by its Secretary – Respondent


A. GANGADHARA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THE substantial question of law lor my consideration in this Second Appeal is whether a service inam is a wakf within the the meaning of the Wakf Act, 1954.

( 2 ) IT arises this way. The plaint schedule property consists of Acs. 2. 87 cents of dry land and 49 cents of wet land situated in kalavagunta village in Chittoor District. The land was purchased by the plaintiff (P. W. 1) under the registered sale deed (Ex. A-1) dated 16-2-1963 from one Ghouse Khan and his son Khader Nawab Khan for rs. 5,000/ -. This land forms part of a larger extent of Acs. 6. 28 cents of land comprised in T. P. No. 824 which was notified as wakf property under the Wakf Act, 1954 by means of the notification (Ex. A-2) dated 28-6-1962 in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette. The plaintiff who had purchased the suit property after the issue of the notification contends that the suit property is not wakf property but forms part of the personal inam granted to the ancestors of his vendors and in any event he had acquired title to the suit property by adverse possession. Hence he filed O. S. 198/1968 for a declaration that the aforesaid notification Ex. A-2 was illegal and void.

( 3 ) ON the ot













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