Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Pending Judgment & Transfer to Wakf Board - Several sources indicate that cases involving Wakf properties or disputes are often transferred to the Wakf Board or Wakf Tribunal, especially when jurisdictional issues arise or when the property is classified as Wakf land. For example, ["M. Govinda Rao VS A. P. State Wakf Board, Hyderabad - Andhra Pradesh"] states that the Wakf Rules read thus: ... the Board may transfer, purchase or alienate Wakf property under Sections 51 and 53 of the Act, and emphasizes that Any purchase, sale, exchange or transfer of Wakf property by the Board shall be subject to prior approval of... the Wakf Tribunal or Board. Similarly, ["Jehangirkhan Alifkhan Pathan VS Ilyasbhai Ismailbhai Vora Thr’ Power of Attorney - Gujarat"] clarifies that only the Wakf Tribunal has jurisdiction in the matter and the parties can approach the Wakf Tribunal, and that eviction proceedings can only be decided by the Civil Court and not by the Wakf Tribunal, highlighting jurisdictional boundaries. ["Kerala State Wakf Board vs Sebastian Joseph - Kerala"] confirms that Section 55G provided for a statutory transfer of actions pending before any Court or authority upon constitution of the Wakf Tribunal, but also notes that there is no provision in the Waqf Act to transfer a validly instituted suit to the Waqf Tribunal after the constitution of the Waqf Tribunal, suggesting that pending cases not initially filed before the Tribunal may not automatically transfer to it.
Set Aside & Transfer Orders - Many judgments reveal that orders of transfer or decisions made by authorities like the District Court or Civil Court can be set aside if found to be without jurisdiction or improperly passed. For instance, ["Prem Kishan VS Bundu - Rajasthan"] states that the order impugned dated 3-5-2001 of the learned District Judge, Bhilwara is set aside, and that the transfer order is nothing more than an order of transfer, which can be challenged if not passed in accordance with law. ["T. Kunjabdulla, S/o. (Late) Ibrahim VS Ahammed Varikkodi, S/o. Late Kunjimoosa Haji - Kerala"] mentions that the judgment of the Tribunal is set aside being without jurisdiction, emphasizing that improper jurisdictional assumptions can invalidate such orders. Similarly, ["Paidimarri Balasubba Chetty VS Jutur Reddiya - Andhra Pradesh"] discusses that the lower Court ought to have taken into consideration the fact that the previous insolvency proceedings were in a way still pending, and that the order of transfer was itself a nullity, implying that transfers made without proper jurisdiction or procedure can be reversed.
Jurisdiction & Procedural Issues - Several sources highlight that courts and tribunals must have proper jurisdiction to decide cases involving Wakf properties or disputes. ["Zaheer Ahmed Khan VS Chief Executive Officer, A. P. State Wakf Board, Hyderabad - Andhra Pradesh"] notes that the civil court has jurisdiction to adjudicate the pending suit despite the bar under Section 85, if no specific transfer provisions exist. Conversely, ["Jain Swetamwar Sangh Dhamotar VS Gajendra Singh S/o Shri Dayal Singh - Rajasthan"] states that no power has been conferred on the High Court to set aside the order passed by the District Court on an application under Section 24 of C.P.C., indicating limits to judicial review of transfer orders. ["XXX (Tanveer Rahman, deceased) S/o. Late Khairur Rahman VS Assam Board of Wakf, Represented by its Chairman - Gauhati"] confirms that the judgment and decree passed by the Tribunal on 24.07.2003 is without jurisdiction and therefore it is not sustainable in the eyes of law, underscoring that jurisdictional overreach can invalidate tribunal decisions.
Impact of Judicial Decisions & Remand - Several judgments reveal that higher courts have remitted cases back to lower courts or tribunals for proper adjudication, often after setting aside earlier orders. For example, ["Smt.Rubab Bai & Ors vs Madhya Pradesh Wakf Board & Ors - Madhya Pradesh"] states that the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the High Court for deciding the appeal in accordance with law, indicating judicial oversight over improper transfers or jurisdictional errors. ["XXX (Tanveer Rahman, deceased) S/o. Late Khairur Rahman VS Assam Board of Wakf, Represented by its Chairman - Gauhati"] also notes that the High Court set aside the judgment of the lower courts and restored the suit, emphasizing the importance of proper jurisdiction and procedural correctness.
Analysis and Conclusion:Overall, the materials suggest that pending judgments or applications related to Wakf properties are often transferred or set aside if orders are made without proper jurisdiction, procedural irregularities, or violation of statutory provisions. The transfer to the Wakf Board or Wakf Tribunal is generally permissible when the case involves Wakf property, but such transfers must adhere to legal procedures. If orders are found to be without jurisdiction or improperly passed, courts have the authority to set aside or remand these decisions, as seen in multiple judgments ["Prem Kishan VS Bundu - Rajasthan"], ["T. Kunjabdulla, S/o. (Late) Ibrahim VS Ahammed Varikkodi, S/o. Late Kunjimoosa Haji - Kerala"], ["Paidimarri Balasubba Chetty VS Jutur Reddiya - Andhra Pradesh"]. Therefore, a pending judgment or application may be set aside and transferred to the Wakf Board or Tribunal if jurisdictional or procedural flaws are established, ensuring proper adjudication under the relevant Wakf laws.
In the complex landscape of Indian law, questions about jurisdictional transfers often arise, especially in matters involving vulnerable groups like children or specialized properties. One such query that frequently puzzles litigants is: pending judgment set aside application will transfer to waif board. Here, waif board likely refers to bodies like Child Welfare Committees, Juvenile Justice Boards, or even Waqf Boards in specific contexts. This post delves into whether such pending applications can indeed be transferred, drawing from the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act), key judicial precedents, and analogous principles from Waqf law.
Understanding this is crucial for parents, guardians, legal practitioners, and institutions dealing with child welfare or endowment disputes. While this analysis provides general insights, it is not a substitute for professional legal advice—consult a qualified lawyer for case-specific guidance.
Pending applications to set aside judgments or orders, particularly those related to juvenile detention, custody, or protection, may be transferred to specialized authorities under certain conditions. The JJ Act, 2015, prioritizes the child's welfare, mandating that cases involving children in need of care and protection (CNCP) or juveniles in conflict with law (JCL) be handled by Juvenile Justice Boards (JJBs) or Child Welfare Committees (CWCs).A., S/o. Sona Ram, Through Natural Guardina His Father Shri Sona S/o Shri Idan Ram vs State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor - 2025 0 Supreme(Raj) 2240
Key mechanisms include:- Rules 10, 10A, 11, and 13 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2016, which outline procedures for case transfers and ensure child-centric proceedings.- Section 12 of the JJ Act, supporting transfers to juvenile authorities for fair adjudication.A., S/o. Sona Ram, Through Natural Guardina His Father Shri Sona S/o Shri Idan Ram vs State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor - 2025 0 Supreme(Raj) 2240
Courts, including the Supreme Court and High Courts, have consistently directed such transfers to uphold the paramountcy of child welfare.Mayank Ojha (Minor) Thru. Here Natural Guardian Mother Shashi vs State Of U.P. Thru. Home Secy. Lko. - 2025 Supreme(Online)(All) 1794
The Supreme Court in a landmark ruling clarified: applications or cases involving juveniles pending before regular courts can be transferred to Juvenile Justice Boards or Child Welfare Committees, emphasizing that the welfare and safety of the child are paramount.A., S/o. Sona Ram, Through Natural Guardina His Father Shri Sona S/o Shri Idan Ram vs State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor - 2025 0 Supreme(Raj) 2240
Similarly, the Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court reinforced this in a case where pending applications related to child custody or detention were routed to appropriate juvenile bodies, noting the statutory emphasis on specialized jurisdiction.Mayank Ojha (Minor) Thru. Here Natural Guardian Mother Shashi vs State Of U.P. Thru. Home Secy. Lko. - 2025 Supreme(Online)(All) 1794
Another precedent affirms: if a matter pertains to a juvenile or child in need of care, transfer is appropriate and often mandated to the relevant JJB or CWC.Bachpan Bachao Andolan VS Union of India - 2011 3 Supreme 303A., S/o. Sona Ram, Through Natural Guardina His Father Shri Sona S/o Shri Idan Ram vs State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor - 2025 0 Supreme(Raj) 2240
These decisions underscore that courts can initiate transfers suo motu or upon application, ensuring proceedings align with the child's best interests.
For a pending application to set aside a judgment:- If linked to juvenile matters (e.g., custody, detention), transfer to JJB/CWC is typical, as general courts defer to specialized forums.- The process safeguards procedural rights while prioritizing welfare.
Courts assess factors like the child's age, case nature, and statutory compliance. High Courts and the Supreme Court have invoked their powers under Article 226/32 of the Constitution to facilitate such shifts.Mayank Ojha (Minor) Thru. Here Natural Guardian Mother Shashi vs State Of U.P. Thru. Home Secy. Lko. - 2025 Supreme(Online)(All) 1794
Similar transfer principles appear in Waqf law, offering broader context. Under the Waqf Act, 1995, disputes over Waqf properties must be adjudicated by Waqf Tribunals, barring civil courts. For instance, a High Court ruled: Civil courts lack jurisdiction over disputes involving Wakf properties as per the WAKF ACT, sections 83 and 85, directing transfers to the Tribunal.Masid-e-Makkapur and Madrasa-e Bilal Wakf Committee, Rep. by its President/Muthavalli, Mohammed Amjed Hussain vs D. Sasikumar - 2024 Supreme(Mad) 2463
In another case involving Waqf management: the application filed by the Waqf Board is to be allowed by transferring all the applications and papers which are pending... to the Tamilnadu Waqf Board.I. S. Ibrahim VS Principal Secretary to the Government, Backward Class, Most Backward Class and Minorities Welfare (T1) Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 2023 Supreme(Mad) 917
The Waqf Board can even review its resolutions, as seen where the Waqf Board itself can rectify the earlier Acts or set aside the earlier orders by a subsequent resolution.Hazrat Peer Raje Bagsar, Peerwadi VS Maharashtra State Board of Wakf
These cases highlight a common thread: pending proceedings, including set-aside applications, may transfer to specialized boards (Waqf Tribunals/Boards) when jurisdiction mandates it, mirroring juvenile transfers. However, for pre-Tribunal suits, civil courts retain execution powers.T. K. Makkar, S/o. Karrorkutty VS Meeravu Haji, S/o. Oorai - 2024 Supreme(Ker) 1129
In Waqf contexts, transfers ensure statutory compliance, much like the JJ Act's child focus. Yet, exceptions apply if cases involve adults or non-core issues.T. S. A. Guptha VS Joint Collector-II, Hyderabad - 2007 Supreme(AP) 1052
Transfers are not automatic:- Applicable primarily to juvenile/child welfare or Waqf-specific disputes.- If unrelated (e.g., pure adult civil matters), regular courts proceed.- Procedural hurdles: Applications must detail child/Waqf involvement; courts verify jurisdiction.T. K. Makkar, S/o. Karrorkutty VS Meeravu Haji, S/o. Oorai - 2024 Supreme(Ker) 1129
In Waqf execution cases, civil courts may continue if decrees predate Tribunals: In the absence of a provision to transfer the pending suit to the Waqf Tribunal, the civil court has jurisdiction.T. K. Makkar, S/o. Karrorkutty VS Meeravu Haji, S/o. Oorai - 2024 Supreme(Ker) 1129
Delays from frivolous transfer bids are discouraged, as in revenue suits where repeated applications were deemed unjustified.Kalawati VS Board of Revenue - 2024 Supreme(All) 1915
To navigate this:1. File a formal transfer application citing JJ Act sections or Waqf provisions.2. Highlight child/Waqf welfare as paramount.3. Seek suo motu directions if needed.4. Gather evidence of specialized jurisdiction.
Courts typically expedite child matters, directing transfers post-hearing.A., S/o. Sona Ram, Through Natural Guardina His Father Shri Sona S/o Shri Idan Ram vs State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor - 2025 0 Supreme(Raj) 2240
In summary, while transfers are feasible and often directed, outcomes depend on case specifics. This framework promotes justice through specialization. For tailored advice, engage legal experts promptly.
This post is for informational purposes only and reflects general legal positions as of available precedents.
#JuvenileJustice #WaqfBoardTransfer #ChildWelfareLaw
, a reasonable opportunity of being heard, confirm, modify or set aside such decision. ... No.22 dated 18.10.2004, set aside contending that crores of rupees worth Wakf property had been alienated to them for a pittance. ... 2. ... Wakf Rules reads thus: ... "Conditions and restrictions subject to which the Board may transfer, purchase or alienate Wakf property under Sections 51 and 53 of the Act :-(1) Any purchase, sale, exchange or transfer of Wakf property by the #....
For the reasons mentioned above, the impugned judgment of the Calcutta High Court cannot be sustained and it is hereby set aside. We hold that only the Wakf Tribunal has jurisdiction in the matter and the parties can approach the Wakf Tribunal, if so advised. The appeal stands allowed. ... Judgment ... Akil Kureshi, J.—Learned Counsel for the petitioner referred to a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Board of Wakf, West Bengal vs. ... In the aforesaid decision it was held that eviction proceedin....
Sebastian Joseph is set aside with the liberty aforementioned. 14. The order rejecting the application, challenged in O.P.(Wakf) No.7 of 2025 is hereby set aside. O.P. ... In pending W.O.A. ... Now the question which arise before us is, whether the impleading application, pending before the Tribunal as well as decided by the Tribunal at the behest of the parties interested in the property on the basis of the transfer / alienation co....
As per the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sayyed Ali v. ... Accordingly various occupancy right certificates issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer have been set aside by the Joint Collector by order dated 25.2.2006 vacating the stay orders granted earlier in case No.Fl/337/2005 and batch dated 31.3.2005. ... Andhra Pradesh Waif Board, AIR 1998 SC 972 = 1998 (2) ALD (SCSN) 31, it is open for any person to raise a dispute within one year from the date of publication of the list of Wakf under sub-sect....
aside the order of the Waqf Board. ... In that view of the matter, the application filed by the Waqf Board is to be allowed by transferring all the applications and papers which are pending as on date in the scheme suit, and also the Official Trustee has to entrust the management of the Waqf to the Tamilnadu Waqf Board. ... between the Board of Trustees, some of which are pending and some of which have been decided by this Court. ... ....
Accordingly, the present revision application stands dismissed along with pending Civil Application No.7095 of 2018 for intervention. ... Thus, it seems that the Waqf Board itself can rectify the earlier Acts or set aside the earlier orders by a subsequent resolution. 13. ... The applicants have contended that the resolution No.20, dated 28.04.2005 accepted by the then CEO, has not been set aside and therefore, the Subsequent CEO was not empowered t....
Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. 12. ... Parties through their counsel or themselves are directed to appear before the concerned Waqf Board on 19.8.2024. The judgment of the Tribunal is set aside being without jurisdiction. 18. ... On a revision being filed, the High Court was pleased to set aside the judgment and decree of the Waqf Tribunal inter alia holding that the Waqf Board did not have the....
the order passed by the trial Court is liable to be set aside. ... having jurisdiction for the determination of the dispute, question or other matter relating to such 2 [waqf] or 2 [waqf] property, transfer such application to any other Tribunal having jurisdiction, and, on such transfer, the Tribunal to which the application is so transferred shall deal with the application ... Even as per the pleadings in the plaint, the property belongs to the Wakf Board#....
From perusal of the aforesaid provisions, it is apparently clear that no power has been conferred on the High Court to set aside the order passed by the District Court on an application under Section 24 of C.P.C.” 16. ... When the matter was pending at the evidence stage, the respondent-plaintiff filed an application under Section 24 CPC seeking transfer of the civil suit No.34/2023, pending before the Court of Civil Judge, Pratapgarh to any other jurisdictional court....
P5 application to implead the 14th respondent. 16. In the wake of the above findings, Exts.P6 and P7 are not sustainable, and they are, accordingly, set aside. Ext.P5 stands allowed. ... In the absence of a provision to transfer the pending suit to the Waqf Tribunal, the civil court has jurisdiction to adjudicate the pending suit despite the bar under Section 85. ... In several Central and State enactments wherein an exclusive Tribunal is created for the purpose of dealing with the spe....
9. It is material that suit under Section- 144/116 of the U.P.Revenue Code 2006 filed by petitioners is pending before trial Court for last more than six year due to filing of repeated application of transfer at the instance of defendant/respondent. 10. Considering the entire facts and circumstances, the impugned order dated 1.7.2021, passed by respondent no.1/Board of Revenue in Transfer Application NO.1031/2021 is liable to be set aside and the same is hereby set aside. 11. The writ petition stands allowed. Respondent no.4/S.D.M, Tehsil Sadar, Prayagraj is directed to rem....
Since we intend to direct the Authority to redo the matter with respect to the question as to whether the vacancy fell in the direct recruitment quota or promotion quota, we also leave it open to the Authority to consider the effect of the Regulations on the rights of the parties. Accordingly, the impugned order of transfer will stand set aside. 2 will re-consider the matter, after making proper inquiries and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellant in Special Appeal No. 362 of 2017, appellant in Special Appeal No. 364 of 2017 and also the writ petitioner.
The Executing Court dismissed the petition filed under Section 47 of CPC on the ground that the judgment debtor cannot maintain the petition under Section 47 of CPC, however granted liberty to file additional counter in the execution petition through the impugned order and the executing Court allowed the application filed for appointment of advocate commissioner on giving a finding that to decide the right of judgment debtor to claim compensation for the building in the execution petition, the value of building must be ascertained and thus appointed advocate commissioner. 7. Pendin....
8. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the respondent Board having recognized the petitioner as hereditary mutawalli by issuing proceedings under Section 42 of the Act has to follow the procedure contemplated under Section t?4 of the Act for removal of the petitioner as mutawalli of the institution and there being no such procedure followed before issuance of the proceedings impugned in the writ petition, the said proceedings are liable to be set aside and the petitioner is to be allowed to manage the affairs of the institution. In support of his submissions, ....
4. Kerala Waif Board and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Ors. 3. The Bihar State Sunni Wakf Board v. State of Bihar and Ors.
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
