Madras High Court
VENKATARAMAN
V.Mohamed Mohin - Appellant
Versus
Madras State Wakf Board - Respondent
Decided On : 03/16/1966
The court held that the deed is a wakf alal aulad under Sec. 3(1)(iii) of Act 29 of 1954 and the suit is remanded to the trial Court for determination of the extent to which the property has been dedicated for the religions and charitable purposes mentioned in the deed.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff brought the suits for declaration that the properties mentioned in the deeds are not wakf properties and not liable to be notified under the Act. His contention was that Rukhia Bi did not really intend these documents to come into force and that they were not also valid as wakfs.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that Ex. A-22 is a wakf alal aulad under Sec. 3(1)(iii) of Act 29 of 1954 and the suit is remanded to the trial Court for determination of the extent to which the property has been dedicated for the religions and charitable purposes mentioned in the deed.
Issues: 1. Whether the deeds are valid wakfs? 2. Whether the properties mentioned in the deeds are wakf properties and liable to be notified under the Act?
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the deed is a wakf alal aulad under Sec. 3(1)(iii) of Act 29 of 1954 and the suit is remanded to the trial Court for determination of the extent to which the property has been dedicated for the religions and charitable purposes mentioned in the deed. The court observed that the deed is styled as a wakf deed and the term must be known to every Muslim. It definitely implies a transfer of ownership to God. Secondly, there is no transfer of ownership of the properties to the plaintiff. He is only given a right to enjoy the income subject to the performance of the charities. Further, there is also a prohibition against any alienation which is consistent with a wakf and is inconsistent with a transfer of ownership to the plaintiff.
Final Decision: Appeal partly allowed.
2. Before proceeding further, it would be convenient to give a tree translation of the two deeds, in so far as they are material.
Ex. A-32 dated 7-10-1940 : "I executed a wakf deed on 5-5-1938, but I am not satisfied with it. Hence, I am cancelling that and executing this wakf deed. That is to say, I myself shall enjoy the income of the undermentioned properties valued at Rs. 2,000 for my lifetime and after my lifetime Mohamed Mahin Sahib (plaintiff), that is the "son of my elder brother Abdul Rahim Sahib shall conduct the following charities and other arrangements from and out of the income of the said properties. After him his descendants shall hereditarily conduct the above affairs. In case he has no descendants his elder sister Abibunnissa's descendants shall manage. If the above two have no heirs, Mahbooo Begum Sahiba and Asia Begum Sahiba and their descendants shall manage. That is to say, they shall take possession of the under mentioned properties and out of the income therefrom shall do charities and other affairs. None of the above persons shall be entitled to sell or alienate the above properties. The buildings mentioned below shall be rented out, and out of the income, the residue, after payment of Union taxes and repairs, shall be utilised for the following charities : (1) lighting of the mosque in Kaveripakkam, Kondapuram Road, as I have been hitherto doing, and payment of not more than Rs. 10 per month for the Pesh Imam of the mosque and reading of Koran; (2) performance of gurubali with sacrifice of one goat in the month of Bakrid every year in the mime of myself and my husband; (3) payment of Rs. 10 per month for each of two persons, Dadamian and his wife and Rs. 25 annually for their clothing; (4) If there is any residue left out of the income, the poor have to be fed once every year. I have only a right to enjoy the income of the following properties during my lifetime, otherwise I will not be entitled to alienate them."
Exhibit A-22, dated 4-8-1941 : Deed of Wakf :- "I shall he entitled to enjoy the income of the following properties, valued at Rs. 2,000 and after my lifetime, Mohamed Mahin Sahib (plaintiff), son of my elder brother Abdul Rahim Sahib, shall receive and enjoy the income from the below-mentioned properties and shall do the charities as specified below. After his lifetime his descendants shall enjoy tile income from the properties and conduct the undermentioned charities. If he has no issues, his elder sister Habibunnissa Sahiba or her descendants shall receive and enjoy the income from the undermentioned properties and out of the income do the undermentioned charities, that is to say, in accordance with the family custom, a barasia and tathia (annual ceremony) of my father, Abdul Khadar Sahib and also feed a traveller every day. The person mentioned by me and their descendants shall conduct the charities from out of the income. Otherwise, they will not be entitled to alienate the properties."
3. Rukhia Bi d
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.