The rejection of a plaint for lack of cause of action must be substantively justified; merely asserting lack of merit without proper consideration of presented evidence is insufficient.

ORDER :

A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

Aggrieved against the order passed by the Tamil Nadu Wakf Tribunal at Chennai in rejecting the suit in O.S.No.30 of 2022 by the fair and decreetal order dated 19th September 2023 passed in I.A.No.49 of 2023, and seeking restoration the same, the plaintiff has come forward with the present civil revision petition.

2. Brief facts of the case:-

i) The petitioner/plaintiff had filed the suit seeking a declaration that suit A and B schedule properties are the waqf properties and the same absolutely belong to the plaintiff waqf and for grant of permanent injunction restraining the defendants in any manner interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit properties contending as under:-

a) The plaintiff is the Hereditary Muthawali of the Hazarth Syed Mustaffa Sha Aulia Dargha and Sirukadambur Dargha Waqf(a) Hazarth Khaja Fathesha Mohamed Dargja Waqf. The waqf is notified by the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board under Registration nos.200 and 201 of 2000.

b) The object of the waqf being pious, religious and charitable one to feed the poor and needy people, some properties had been dedicated for the upkeep and maintenance of the Dargha. The waqf had leased out some of the lands on land rent to 129 persons in order to augment income to the waqf and to fulfil the waqf objects in which 8 persons had put up residential building and obtain electricity connection for the same and 31 persons had put up basement on the leased out land.

c) The fifth defendant had passed an order dated 21.2.2000 recognizing the plaintiff as Hereditary Muthavalli of the Waqf and issued Proforma.

d) Sirukadambur Dargha Waqf (a) Hazarth Khaja Fathesha Mohamed Dargha Waqf, situate in Survey No.59/1 of Sittampoondi Village, Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District hereinafter referred as Schedule A property is more than 400 years old and Muslim community people are performing day to day worship and rituals and the plaintiff has been conducting Urus function every year in the month of April.

e) In the waqf land, there is a graveyard for burying Muslim community people and there were attempts from land grabbers to grab the waqf land and the same has been thwarted by the plaintiff with the help of the community people as well as waqf officials.

f) Whileso, in the month of November 2016, when some of the local people made attempt to encroach upon the waqf land taking advantage of the fact that the land in Survey No.59/1 had been shown as Government Poramboke. The plaintiff had preferred a complaint with the Inspector of police, Ananthapuram Police Station which was taken on the file as C.S.R. No. 258 of 2016 under section 107 of Cr.P.C.

g) Subsequently, the fourth defendant directed the Village Administrative Officer, Sittampoondi Village, Revenue Inspector and Inspector of Police to prevent the encroachment on the waqf land and thereupon, the revenue officials and police had evicted the encroachers on the waqf land.

h) The said encroachers, after their failed attempt in encroaching on the waqf land, had made a representation before the fourth defendant for assignment of the waqf land in their favour by invoking the provisions of the Revenue Standing Orders and the same was opposed by the plaintiff.

i) After removal of the encroachment by the Inspector of Police, no further action has been taken by the Police and the F.I.R was forwarded to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Gingee Taluk for initiating action under section 107 of Cr.P.C. The Deputy Superintendent of police, Gingee Taluk, by proceedings dated 10th December 2016, had reque