( 1 ) THIS Civil Revision Petition is filed under Sec. 18 of the Karnataka Small causes Court Act, 1964 to set aside the order dated 12-8-2003 passed in S. C. No. 15334/ 2003 by the XVAdditional Small Cause court, Mayo Hall in (SCCH-19) Bangalore.

( 2 ) THE case of the petitioner- M/s. Mohamed Musa Sait Wakf, A Wakf-ul-Aulad is that it has filed a suit for ejectment against the respondents and sought for delivery of actual vacant physical possession of the property from the respondents and other consequent relief. According to it, the petition schedule property was let out to the respondents under a lease deed dated 1-6-2000 for a period of 3 years on a monthly rent of Rs. 2,000/-, since the respondents were irregular in paying the rent and they have sub-let the property to others. The rent derived from the petition schedule property was to be distributed among the beneficiaries in accordance to the Wakf deed dated 30-10-1920. The petitioner-plaintiff was a Wakf-alal-Aulad simpliciter and is exempted from the application and purview of Section 85 of the Wakf Act. The memo filed in S. C. No. 15334/03 by the defendants-respondents was allowed by the trial Court and held that there is no jurisdiction to entertain. Therefore, the petitioner-plaintiff has come up with this Civil Revision petition.

( 3 ) HEARD the arguments of learned counsel for the revision petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

( 4 ) THE learned counsel for the revision petitioner contended that the ancestors of the petitioner-M/s. Mohamed Musa Sait Wakf, has executed a lease deed in 1920. It is a Wakf property dedicated for religious and charitable institution. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner-plaintiff that the respondents has taken the property for lease on 1-6-2000 for a period of three years on monthly rent of rs. 2,000/- The respondents were irregular in payment of rent therefore, the petitioner herein filed a suit for ejectment. It is further argued that when the petitioner-plaintiff filed a suit the respondents-defendants filed a memo under Sec. 85 of the Wakf Act, 1995 to the effect that the Small Cause Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit for ejectment. Therefore, the trial Court has wrongly interpreted and considered that the Sec. 85 of the Wakf Act, 1995 is a total bar. It is argued that the Wakf Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain any dispute that arises with regard to the tenancy in between the landlord and tenant in respect of the suit schedule property. Me further argued that the Wakf deed of 1920 at Annexure-C executed by Mohammed Musa sait son of Hajee Ebrahim Sait creating Wakf was in his favour, his family, children, and descendants, and ultimately for the benefit of the poor properties belonging to him of a permanent character. Therefore, the suit schedule property was represented by Muthavalli. the descendants as well as his children have got every right to enjoy the suit schedule property if no descendants were alive then ultimately the benefit of the Wakf property should go to the poor persons. It is contended that the trial Court has wrongly interpreted that the filing of a suit for ejectment by the petitioner-plaintiff is a total bar. The impugned order suffers from illegality and incorrectness and therefore, the same is to be set aside. While arguing the case, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner drew the attention of this Court to the various provisions and the definition under Wakf Act of Sec. 85 so also the commentary written by the author S. A. Kadar, Eastern Law House, wherein the author has discussed the jurisdiction of the Wakf tribunal. Therefore, the revision petitioner herein has rightly filed a suit for ejectment. The Wakf-al-Aulad is a wakf within the meaning of deed of wakf which discloses that the author of the wakf deed to enjoy the fruits of the property by himself, his children and the descendants and thereafter the benefit, of wakf will go to the poor pe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document