Back
MAYANK KUMAR JAIN
Bhagwan Shrikrishna Virajman at Katra Keshav Dev Khewat No. 255 – Appellant
Versus
U. P. Sunni Central Waqf Board – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Mayank Kumar Jain, J.
Heard S/Sri C.S. Vaidyanathan, learned Senior Counsel, Hari Shanker Jain, Vishnu Shanker Jain, assisted by Ms. Mani Munjal and Mr Parth Yadav, Rahul Sahai, learned Senior Counsel, Anil Kumar Airi, learned Senior Counsel, Mahendra Pratap Singh, Saurabh Tiwari, Ajay Kumar Singh, Hare Ram Tripathi, Prabhash Pandey, Pradeep Kumar Sharma, Vinay Sharma, Gaurav Kumar, Siddharth Srivastava, Anil Kumar Singh, Ashish Kumar Srivastava, Ashvanee Kumar Srivastava, Satyaveer Singh, Dr. Dharmesh Chaturvedi, Arya Suman Pandey, Rama Nand Gupta, Harshit Gupta, Saurabh Basu, Gopal Srivastava, Anil Kumar Bisen, Ajay Pratap Singh, Rana Singh, Amit Kumar, Naman Kishore Sharma, Jawahar Yadav, Kumar Beenu Singh, Aniruddh Tiwari, Ugrasen Kumar Pandey, Radhey Shyam Yadav, Brahm Kumar Tiwari, Mayank Singh, Tejas Singh, Alok Dubey, Kumar Anish, A. K. Malviya, Amitabh Trivedi, Rajesh Kumar Shukla, Mrs. Rama Goyal Bansal and Mrs. Reena N Singh, learned Counsel for the plaintiffs. S/Sri Rajendra Maheshwari, Advocate and Ashutosh Pandey, appearing in person.
Mrs. Tasneem Ahmadi, S/Sri Mehmood Pracha, Nasiruzzaman, Pranav Ojha, Hare Ram Tripathi, Manoj Kumar Singh, Afzal Ahmad, Tanvee
The court ruled that the plaints disclose a valid cause of action, are not barred by limitation, and the religious character of the property requires evidence to be determined at trial.
The Places of Worship Act, 1991 does not bar the determination of the religious character of a place of worship, which must be established through evidence in court.
Civil courts retain jurisdiction to determine eviction claims even if waqf status is asserted, unless unequivocally proven as such. Defendants cannot contest landlord's title without substantiating t....
Expression ‘waqf by user’ finding place in Section 3 (r) (i) of the Act is a defined expression and is not qualified by any word to suggest that it has to be of immemorial user, the Court would have ....
Wakf Property - Rejection of plaint - Bar to the tenability of the suit in the absence of prayer of possession, does not apply with equal force.
The court ruled that temple property cannot be alienated by trustees without obtaining necessary permissions and demonstrating community consent as per applicable law.
The court established that a sale deed transferring property of a deity without proper authorization is invalid, making recovery suits unmaintainable if the deity is not a party.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Executive Officer has the right to file a suit for temple properties, and the Civil Court has jurisdiction to decide the title of the prop....
(1) Suit for permanent injunction in respect of Waqf property is maintainable before Waqf Tribunal.(2) Waqf Tribunal shall be deemed to be a Civil Court and shall have same powers as may be exercised....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
