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

2005 Supreme(Mad) 143

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MARKANDEY KATJU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. MURUGESAN
I.Salam Khan - Appellant
Versus
The Tamil Nadu Wakf Board & Others - Respondents
W.A.No.2344 of 2000 and W.P.Nos.12710 & 15945 of 2000
Decided On : 31 January 2005

Advocates Appeared: For The Appellant:G.Masilamani, Senior Counsel, Md.Habeed Raja, Advocate. For The Respondents:R1, R2, Munisuddin Sheriff, R4, AR.L.Sundaresan, R5, Md.Ashfaq Rafi, R6, M.Kalyanasundaram, Senior Counsel, G.Sethuraman, Advocate.

Wakf Tribunal has jurisdiction to decide all matters regarding wakf properties.

Headnote:Wakf Act 1954-Section 83(1)-So far jurisdiction of Wakf Tribunal is concerned, it has power to decide all disputes relating to Wakf property-Also has powers of Civil Court under the Code.

Judgment :-

Markandey Katju, CJ.

This writ appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the learned single Judge dated 25.09.2000. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have carefully perused the impugned order. The dispute in this case relates to a wakf.

2. In our opinion, all matters pertaining to Wakfs should be filed in the first instance before the Wakf Tribunal constituted under Section 83 of the Wakf Act, 1995 and should not be entertained by this Court straight away under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

3. It may be mentioned that the Wakf Act, 1995 is a recent parliamentary statute which has constituted a special Tribunal for deciding disputes relating to Wakfs. The obvious purpose of constituting such a Tribunal was that a lot of petitions relating to Wakfs were being filed in the Courts in India and they were occupying a lot of time of all the Courts in the country, which resulted in increase in pendency of cases in the Courts. Hence, a special Tribunal has been constituted for deciding such matters.

4. Section 83(1) of the Wakf Act, 1995 states,

“83. Constitution of Tribunals, etc. – (1) The State Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute as many Tribunals as it may think fit, for the determination of any dispute, question or other matter relating to a Wakf or Wakf property under this Act and define the local limits and jurisdiction under this Act of each of such Tribunals.”

5. Section 84 of the Act states,

“84. Tribunal to hold proceedings expeditiously and to furnish to the parties copies of its decision – Whenever an application is made to a Tribunal for the determination of any dispute, question or other matter relating to a Wakf or Wakf property it shall hold its proceedings as expeditiously as possible and shall as soon as practicable on the conclusion of the hearing of such matter give its decision in writing and furnish a copy of such decision to each of the parties to the dispute.”

6. Thus, the Wakf Tribunal can decide all disputes, questions or other matters relating to a Wakf or Wakf property. The words “any dispute, question or other matters relating to a Wakf or Wakf property” are, in our opinion, words of very wide connotation. Any dispute, question or other matters whatsoever and in whatever manner which arises relating to a Wakf or Wakf property can be decided by the Wakf Tribunal. The word ‘Wakf’ has been defined in Section 3(r) of the Wakf Act, 1995 and hence once the property is found to be a Wakf property as defined in Section 3(r), then any dispute, question or other matter relating to it should be agitated before the Wakf Tribunal. It is not proper for this Court to straight away entertain writ petitions relating to a Wakf or Wakf property when there is a special Tribunal constituted for this purpose.

7. No doubt, alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to the filing of writ petitions, but at the same time it is well settled that writ jurisdiction is discretionary jurisdiction and when there is an alternative remedy, ordinarily a party must resort to that remedy first before approaching this court. Entertaining writ petitions straight away without insisting that a party should first avail of the alternative remedy is an over liberal approach which has caused immense difficulties to the High Courts in the country because they have added to the huge arrears. The Courts have already become overburdened by this over liberal approach instead of following the settled legal principle that a writ petition should ordinarily be dismissed if there is an alternative remedy. The High Courts in India are already tottering and reeling under the burden of massive arrears which have flooded the dockets of the Court, and such kind of over liberal approach has only multiplied this problem manifold. If this approach is further continued a time will surly come when the High Courts will find it impossible to function. All this has happened because unfort





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