2016 Supreme(All) 661
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : MRS. SUNITA AGARWAL, J.
WAQF MUSAMMAT SHARIFAN BIWI ....Petitioner
Versus
Dr. PRABHU SARAN RAJVEDI AND OTHERS .....Respondents
(Civil Misc.Writ Petition No. 4177 of 2016, decided on 31st May, 2016)
Counsel :
Nitin Sharma and W.H. Khan for the Petitioner; H.R. Misra, Abhishek Mishra, Abhishek Sharma, M.A. Qadeer, Mohammad Hisham Qadeer and S.C. for the Respondents.
Headnote:Waqf Act, 1995—Sections 85, 40, 36, 37, 4, 5, 6, 2, 61, 64 and 51—Waqf—Adjudication upon—Extent of jurisdiction—Sale-deed in question—Waqf property—Dispute raised by tenant of disputed property as a result of execution of a sale-deed—Object of 1995 Act is to ensure better management of Waqf property—With respect to suit property, a valid Waqf was created under a valid Waqf deed—A suit seeking eviction of the tenants from what is admittedly a Waqf property could be filed only before the Civil Court and not before Tribunal—A valid Waqf cannot be revoked by a cancellation deed—Appellate Court erroneous in holding that Waqf deed was cancelled by the Waqif—Plaintiffs being tenants in the suit property had no right to seek cancellation of sale-deeds—Appellate Court overreached its jurisdiction and recorded a finding that the Waqf was not in existence—Impugned order set aside. [Paras 33 to 85]
Result; Petition Allowed.
Hon’ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal, J.—Heard Shri W.H. Khan, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Nitin Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri M.A. Qadeer, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Shamim Ahmad, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 9 to 11. Shri Ashish Kumar Singh, learned Advocate has appeared for respondent Nos. 1 to 8.
2. This petition is directed against the findings recorded by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 17, Allahabad in Civil Appeal No. 88 of 2004 (Manish Prakash v. Dr. Prabhu Sharan Rajvedi and others) vide judgment and order dated 22.8.2005 with regard to the suit property which is stated to be a Waqf property.
3. The brief facts relevant to note before dealing with the controversy in hand are:
One Sharifan Bibi daughter of Musammat Imaman Bibi was exclusive owner of House No. 1, Shiv Charan Lal Road, Allahabad and House No. 14, Dhondipur, Allahabad. She also owned a House No. 205, Uncha Mandi, Allahabad.
4. By means of a registered Waqf deed dated 26.2.1932, she created a Waqf known as Waqf Sharifan Bibi with respect to her two properties namely 1, Shiv Charan Lal Road, Allahabad and House No. 14 Dondipur, Allahabad in and vested in Allahtala (God). The aforesaid Waqf deed was registered on 26.2.1932 in Bahi No. 1, Zild No. 613 on pages 298-301 at serial No. 362 in the office of the Sub-Registrar. Mussammat Sharifan Bibi had no issues, she died sometimes in the year 1951-52, her only brother Rahimuddin predeceased her.
5. The present petition arises out of Appeal No. 88 of 2004, the dispute herein is with regard to Premises No. 1, Shiv Charan Lal Road, Allahabad. In the municipal record, this property was initially recorded in the exclusive name of Mushammat Sharifan Bibi, however, at a later stage her name was entered/mutated as Mutwalli. After her death, the name of Sri Quammaruddin @ Kalekhan son of Rahimuddin was recorded as Mutwalli Waqf Sharifan Bibi in the municipal record. After death of Quammaruddin, Nizamuddin grand son of Rahimuddin was appointed Mutwalli and his name was also recorded as such in the municipal register.
6. It is noteworthy that Waqf Sharifan Bibi is also registered with U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board, Lucknow and is entered as such in the register of Waqfs maintained under Section 37 of the Waqf Act.
7. The present proceeding arises out of a dispute raised by the tenants of the disputed property namely 1, Shiv Charan Lal Road, Allahabad as a result of execution of a registered sale-deed dated 4.7.2002 by Nizamuddin, the Mutwalli. The tenants/respondents of the suit property filed an Original Suit No. 430 of 2002 (Dr. P.S. Rajvedi and others v. Manish Prakash and others) seeking injunction against defendant Nos. 1 to 3 including defendant No. 4 on the plea that the defendant No. 4 had illegally sold the Waqf property to defendant Nos. 1 to 3 and defendant Nos. 1 to 3 may be restrained from interfering in their possession. A relief of declaration of the sale-deeds dated 4.7.2002 and 5.7.2002, executed in favour of defendant Nos. 1 to 3 by defendant No. 4, as null and void document was also sought. The suit was contested by all the defendants. Defendant Nos. 1 to 2, defendant No. 3, defendant No. 4 and defendant No. 5 have filed their separate written statements. The defendant Nos. 1 to 2 filed a counter claim for relief of permanent injunction against the plaintiff’s from raising construction, forcefully entering into any portion of the suit property and from alienating it in any matter. A further relief of restraining them from interfering in defendant’s possession and ownership was also sought. The defendant No. 3 filed a counter claim for damages for the act of defamation of the plaintiffs.
8. The trial Court by judgment and order dated 24.8.2004 partly decreed the suit restraining the defendants from interfering in possession and occupation of the plaintiffs/tenants of the suit property except by adopting due process of law, however, the r