The main legal point established in the judgment is that the relief sought in the main application relates to a continuing cause of action and hence the question of limitation does not arise. The court also emphasized that the main case cannot be rejected on the ground of technicalities.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed Under Article 227 of Constitution of India, praying to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 28.07.2023 made in I.A.No.350 of 2023 in O.A.No.41 of 2023 on the file of the Tamil Nadu Waqf Tribunal, Chennai.

1. The petitioners have filed this revision petition to set aside the order dated 28.07.2023 made in I.A. No. 350 of 2023 in O.A. No. 41 of 2023 on the file of the Tamil Nadu Waqf Tribunal, Chennai.

2. Heard Mr. Nissar Ahmed, learned senior counsel for Mr. N. A. Nissir Hussain learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. M. J. Jaseem Mohamed, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 3, Mr. C. Sankar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 4 & 5 and perused the materials available on record.

3. The respondents 1 to 3 are the applicants in O.A.No.41 of 2023 before the Wakf Tribunal. The said application was filed praying to call for the records of the 2nd respondent/Board relating to the order dated 05.03.2019 appointing the 3rd respondent as Chief Hereditary Trustee in Hazrath Syed Moosa Sha Khaderi Darga and the orders dated 13.06.2019 and 25.06.2019 asking the applicants to get the endorsement from 3rd respondent, declare the same as null and void ab-initio and set aside the same. They have also sought for permanent Injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with the legitimate rights of the applicants as turn holding trustees during their respective turn of management of Hazrath Syed Moosa Sha Khaderi Darga situated at Annasalai, Chennai-2 and also directing the 2nd respondent to release the Hundial collections amount due to the applicants in respect of their turn during 2019, 2021 & 2022, which was deposited in the Wakf Account of 1st respondent and continue to release the Hundial collections for the consecutive terms, against the revision petitioners.

4. The revision petitioners herein are the 3rd and 4th respondent in the said application. Immediately, after receipt of notice 3rd and 4th respondents filed an I.A. No. 350 of 2023 in O.A. No. 41 of 2023, under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Rule 8(3) of the Tamil Nadu Waqf Tribunal (conditions of service and procedure) Rules 2016 to reject the main application in O.A. No. 41 of 2023 as it has been filed beyond the period of limitation prescribed under the Rules. As per Section 89 (3) of the Tamil Nadu Waqf Tribunal (Conditions of Service and Procedure) Rules 2016 application before the Tribunal shall be presented within 90 days from the date of the order by which the applicant is aggrieved and if at all any delay the applicant may file supporting application for condoning the delay by adducing proper reason. Rule 8 (1) also makes it clear that the Code of Civil Procedure and Civil Rules of Practice shall apply to the proceedings before the Tribunal. In this case, the orders are dated 05.03.2019, 13.06.2019, 25.06.2019 and the applicants had filed W.P. No. 22283 of 2021 for Writ of Certiorari before this Court to quash the order dated 05.03.2019. The said petition was dismissed on 17.10.2022 granting liberty to the applicants to file application under Section 83 of Waqf Act before the Tribunal and observed that the period from the date of filing of Writ petition i.e., 14.09.2021 till the date on which the certified copy of the order is made ready by the Registry, shall be excluded for the purpose of reckoning limitation. The order copy was issued on 03.11.2022 but only the web copy dated 17.10.2022 has been filed in the typed set in O.A.No.41 of 2023 and the certified copy has not been enclosed. O.A. No. 41 of 2023 was sworn on February 2023 and is understood to have been filed on 21.02.2023 vide SR.No.462 of 2023. Within 90 days the application has to be filed, but the applicants have not filed the application within 90 days and without an application for condoning the delay and as such the O.A. challenging the orders of the year 2019 are not maintainable as they are barred by