This revision petition is directed against the order on

preliminary issue in O.S.No.16/2018 whereby the Tribunal

came to be conclusion that the suit is not maintainable

and as such dismissed the suit.

The brief facts are as below:

The revision petitioner who was the plaintiff before

the Tribunal, contended that it is a Darga notified as a

Waqf Institution under a Gazette Notification of the

Karnataka State Board of Waqfs of Ballari District. It is

stated that the Syed Shah Mustafa Quadri is the

descendant

of

Sufi

Diwan-E-Peer,

Sajjada

Naseen,

successor and mutawalli of the plaintiff institution and the

- 3 -

said institution is in existence since more than 100 years.

It was contended that the suit lands are attached to the

plaintiff Waqf Institution and

the Institution

is in

possession, occupation and enjoyment of the suit lands.

The plaintiff also contended that his Holiness late Hazarat

Syed Shah Neyamutallah Quadri has rendered services as

Sajjada Nasheen and Mutawalli of the plaintiff Institution

for more than 50 years. He did not have any avocation,

business or properties of his own and he did not have

individual source of income. It is contended that the lands

in question were not the personal properties of His

Holiness late Hazarat Syed Shah Neyamutallah Quadri. It

is contended that he was not interested in worldly affairs

and he led a pious life by giving discourse to his disciples

and he was also the Sajjada Nasheen of Darga Hazrat

Syed Shah Khilafat-Ur-Rahman Quadri at Malkhed and he

represented both the Darghas as both Sajjada Nashin and

Mutawalli. It is stated that he died on 06.06.2005 at

Malkhed and thereafter the devotees congregated and

selected Syed Shah Mustafa Quadri as Sajjada nasheen

- 4 -

and Mutawalli of the plaintiff institution. The plaintiff also

contended that the suit properties were never enjoyed by

Hazarat Syed Shah Neyamutallah Quadri as the owner and

possessor and the properties in question are being treated

as the property of the institution and they are yet to be

notified as Waqf properties belonging to the plaintiff Waqf

institution.

3.

It is contended that the defendant No.1 made

an application to the Tahasildar Ballari on 30.08.2005 for

effecting mutation in her name and the Tahasildar without

issuing notice to plaintiff institution passed an order to

change the entries in the name of defendant No.1. It was

challenged before the Assistant Commissioner and who

stayed the order of the Tahasildar. Later the defendant

No.1 who is a stranger to the suit schedule properties was

trying to alienate the suit lands, therefore, plaintiff was

constrained to file OS No.494/2015, before the III

Additional Civil Judge and JMFC at Ballari and later there

was a settlement in O.S.No.494/2015 and it was

- 5 -

withdrawn by the plaintiff. In pursuance to the

settlement, the plaintiff was paying a sum of Rs.50,000/-

per month to the defendant No.1 continuously till 2015.

Later the defendant No.1 at the instigation of her brother

started interfering in the administration and management

of the Darga at Malkhed and she also objected for the

appointment of Syed Shah Mustafa quadri as Sajjada

Nasheen. However, the defendant No.2 i.e. the Karnataka

State Board of Auquaf overruled the objections raised by

the defendant No.1. Taking undue advantage of the entry

the name of defendant No.1 in a record of rights, she

made efforts to dispose of the properties and therefore,

the plaintiff was constrained to file the suit before the

Waqf Tribunal in O.S.No.16/2018. The plaintiff sought a

declaration that the suit property be declared as the Waqf

property and consequently relief of injunction be granted.

4.

The Tribunal vide order dated 07.12.2020

raised two questions about the maintainability which reads

as below:

- 6 -

(a)

Whether the suit for declaration that the

suit properties are the Waqf properties is

maintainable

in

the

absence

of

Gazette

Notification notifying the suit proper