THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA I.A.No.2 OF 2023 IN/AND CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5653 of 2006 AND CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1869/2018

COMMON ORDER:

Since the lis involved in these revision petitions are same, they were heard together and are being disposed of by way of this common order.

2. C.R.P.No.5653 of 2006 is filed by revision petitioners/plaintiffs ; and C.R.P.No.1869 of 2018 is filed by revision petitioners/defendant Nos.3 to 5 and proposed defendant Nos.4 to 8 challenging the judgment and decree dated 28.08.2006 passed in O.S.No.88 of 2000 by the Andhra Pradesh Wakf Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short ‘the Tribunal’). In CRP.No.5653 of 2006, I.A.No.2 of 2023 is filed by petitioner who is proposed respondent to be impleaded as Respondent No.12 in the said CRP.

3. The parties herein are referred to as arrayed in OS.No.88 of

2000.

4. The brief facts of the case are that the plaintiffs - the Managing Committee of Idgah Farooqnagar and the A.P. State Wakf Board, filed suit contending that land adjacent to the Idgah in Farooqnagar was Wakf property and had been unlawfully occupied by the defendants who are heirs of Akula Chennaiah. The land comprising Survey Nos.278 to 283 and 289 was Service Inam land attached to the religious institution and that the defendants had wrongfully obtained an Occupancy Right Certificate (ORC) without notifying the plaintiffs. However, the defendants contended that the land was merely Inam land, and not Wakf property, asserting that their father had been a protected tenant of the said property. In support of the said contention, they relied on the judgment passed in O.S.No.3 of 1968 and order passed in W.P.No.9179 of 1990, which upheld their claims and dismissed the challenge of plaintiffs to the ORC.

5. The Tribunal adjudicated the dispute concerning the alleged wakf property at Farooqnagar by framing multiple issues for determination. The key issues included: (1) whether the plaintiffs were entitled to a declaration that the Occupancy Rights Certificate issued on 16.05.1987 in favor of the father of defendants 3 to 5 was null and void, (2) whether the plaintiffs could seek perpetual injunction to prevent the implementation of the said certificate in official records, (3) whether the plaintiffs were entitled to recovery of possession of lands described in Schedules A to E, (4) whether they were entitled to perpetual injunction against the defendants to prevent interference with their peaceful possession of lands in Schedules F and G, (5) whether the suit lands were wakf properties, (6) whether the suit was barred by limitation, and (7) to what relief, if any, the plaintiffs were entitled. An additional issue was framed regarding whether the judgment in OS.No.3 of 1968 before the District Munsif Court, Shadnagar, and the order passed in WP.No.9179 of 1990 constituted res judicata, thereby, precluding the Tribunal from reexamining the matter.

6. During the proceedings, the plaintiffs presented PW1, Ayub Ali Khan, the President of the Managing Committee of Idgah Farooqnagar, as their witness, and submitted Exs.A1 to A16 as documentary evidence, which included: Ex.A1 (Survey Commissioner Report), Ex.A2 (Town Map), Ex.A3 (Setwar), Ex.A4 (Vasul Bakhi), Ex.A5 (Faisal Patti for 1972-73), Ex.A6 (Proceedings canceling the tenancy certificate), Ex.A7 (Form No.1 issued by RDO for ORC application), Ex.A8 (Form II), Ex.A9 (Form III issued on 26.5.1987), Ex.A10 (Notice issued by MRO to Plaintiff No.1), Ex.A11 (Letter from MRO dated 5.2.2000), Ex.A12 (Letter dated 01.08.2000 from A.P. Wakf Board), Ex.A13 (Permission granted by Wakf Board for filing the suit dated 2.8.2000), Ex.A14 (Death Certificate of the father of defendants 3 to 5 dated 14.5.1996), Ex.A15 (Proceedings of Wakf Board dated 21.4.2000), and Ex.A16 (Order of Wakf Board extending Plaintiff No.1’s Managing Committee on 2.10.2001).

7. On the defense side, DW1 P.Venkatiah and DW2 A.Shankaraiah deposed, asserting that the disputed lands were Inam lands