1. This revision petition, under sub-Section 9 of Section 83 of the Wakf Act, 1995 (for short, the Act), is filed challenging the Order dated 08.03.2016 in I.A. No.458 of 2015 in O.S. No. 59 of 2013 passed by the Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Tribunal at Hyderabad, (for short, the Tribunal), whereby the application filed under Rule 11 of Order VII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, CPC) read with Section 87 of the Act was allowed rejecting the plaint filed before it on the ground that the plaint does not disclose cause of action for the suit.

2. The parties hereinafter be referred to as arrayed in the suit before the Tribunal, for convenience of reference.

3. The defendants 1 to 5 filed a petition in I.A. No. 458 of 2015 before the Tribunal under Rule 11 of Order VII of CPC read with Section 87 of the Act alleging that the plaintiff filed suit in O.S. No.59 of 2013 for cancellation of sale deed dated 12.01.2013 conveying the property in Sy.No.113 admeasuring Ac.4.72 cents situated at Pernamitta Village, Santhanuthalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh, without any basis, only to harass them. The said suit is filed as if the property is a wakf property. It is further contended that the plaintiff falsely stated that the land in Sy.Nos.112 and 113 of an extent of Ac.18.88 cents situated in Pernamitta Village was notified in the official gazette dated 28.06.1962 at serial No.966, it was also surveyed by the Commissioner of the Wakf under the provisions of the Act by suppressing the real facts. In the official gazette dated 28.06.1962 published by the State of Andhra Pradesh at Serial Nos.949 and 966, it is made clear that the lands in Sy.No.113 of Pernamita Village, of an extent of Ac.18.88 cents were never been declared as Wakf properties. In fact Serial No.949 in the gazette dated 28.06.1962 pertains to land in Sy.Nos.159,164, 192 and the land mentioned at serial No.969 is situated in Kolachanakota Village in Sy.No.5. Thus, it is evident that the land in Sy.Nos.112 and 113 situated at Pernamitta Village is not covered by the official gazette dated 28.06.1962. Kolachanakota and Pernamitta are different Villages and the distance between the said two villages is about 40 kilometers. The defendants 1 to 5 have purchased the suit property for a valuable consideration from the 6th defendant, who is the absolute owner of the said property, and it is not the wakf property.

4. It is further contended that when the Sub-Registrar, Santhanuthalapadu Village, refused to register the sale deeds obtained by the petitioners, they approached this Court by filing W.P.No.34155 of 2012 and the same was disposed on 09.11.2012 directing the Sub-Registrar to make enquiry to find out the whether the property is a private property or wakf property to register the sale deeds. In pursuance of the direction, the Sub-Registrar registered the sale deed executed by the 6th defendant in favour of the defendants 1 to 5. Thus, the plaint does not disclose cause of action and there is no prima facie case in favour of the plaintiff and prayed for rejection of the plaint.

5. The 6th defendant did file no counter and remained ex parte.

6. The plaintiff/revision petitioner herein filed counter denying material allegations made in the affidavit annexed to petition, mainly contending that the suit schedule property was attached to the wakf institution of Ashoorkhana, Raja Vari Peerla Chavidi Manyam, situated at Pernamitta Village, Santhanuthalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh, published in the Andhra Pradesh gazette dated 28.06.1962 at Serial Nos.949 and 966 and the said property is the subject matter of the suit and whether the cause of action mentioned in the plaint is correct or not is to be decided only after trial, but not at this stage. Therefore, the plaint shall not be rejected at this stage and prayed for dismissal of the petition.

7. Upon hearing both the counsel, the Tribunal allowed the petition rejecting the plaint ho