IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

C.R. No. 1773 of 2007

DATE OF DECISION:03.04.2007

Ram Partap

..........Petitioner

Versus

Punjab Wakf Board, Ambala Cantt & Ors.

..........Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL

Present:-

Shri Pawan Malik, Advocate

for Shri P.S. Jammu, Advocate

for the petitioner.

****

The petitioner has filed this revision petition under Article 227

of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 19.2.2007,

whereby, the plaint of the petitioner has been rejected under Order 7 Rule

11 CPC while observing as under:-

“Notice under Section 89 of Wakf Act cannot be exempted by

the Court. This provision is not analogus to Section 80 of Civil

Procedure Code because under Section 80(2) of CPC, there

is a provision for exemption of the notice but no such provision

is there in Wakf Act, 1995. Therefore, the plaintiff cannot be

permitted to maintain the suit without serving a notice under

Section 89 of the Wakf Act. The authority reported in 1998 (3)

Recent Civil Reports 191 cited by the learned counsel for the

plaintiff does not help the plaintiff.

The net result of my aforesaid discussion is that the

application for exemption of notice under Section 89 of the

Wakf Act moved by the plaintiff merits dismissal and the same

is hereby dismissed. The application under Order 7 Rule 11

C.R. No. 1773 of 2007

-2-

read with Section 151 of CPC filed by defendants No.1 and 2

succeeds and the same is hereby allowed. Consequently, the

plaint of the suit of the plaintiff is hereby rejected for want of

notice under Section 89 of Wakf Act, 195.”

I have heard counsel for the petitioner.

Undisputedly, before filing the suit for permanent injunction

against the Punjab Wakf Board, and the persons claiming through Board,

no notice has been issued to the Board.

After hearing counsel for the petitioner and in view of the law

laid down by this Court in (2000) 1 PLR 92 titled as Arya Prithinidhi

Sabha (Punjab) Jullundur Now Haryana Sirsa Vs. Punjab Wakf Board,

Ambala Cantt and others , I do not find any ground to interfere in the

aforesaid order.

Dismissed.

April 03, 2007

(SATISH KUMAR MITTAL)

pooja

JUDGE