Delhi District Court
Iqbal Alam & Anr. vs Delhi Wakf Board on 1 April, 2014
CS No.778/11
Iqbal Alam & Anr. Vs Delhi Wakf Board
IN THE COURT OF SH. MANISH KHURANA:JSCCCUMASCJCUMGUDN.
JUDGE (NORTH): ROHINI COURTS:DELHI
1. Sh. Iqbal Alam
S/o Hafiz Abdul
R/o B152, Gali No. 8,
Shalimar Village, Delhi110088.
2. Sh. Mubeen Khan
S/o Sh. Sikander Baksh.
R/o B145, Gali No.9,
Shalimar Village, Delhi110088. ........................... Plaintiffs
Versus
Delhi Wakf Board,
Government of NCT of Delhi.
Through its Chief Executive Officer,
At 5028, Darya Ganj, New Delhi110002 ........................Defendant
DATE OF INSTITUTION :13.12.2011
DATE OF DECISION : 01.04.2014
SUIT FOR DECLARATION AND CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION AND
FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION
VALUE OF SUIT : Rs.330/
COURT FEES PAID :Rs.46/
Page No.1
CS No.778/11
Iqbal Alam & Anr. Vs Delhi Wakf Board
JUDGMENT
1. Vide this judgment, I proceed to dispose of the suit for declaration and cancellation of registration certificate No.364(Wakf No.168) dtd.26.02.2009 issued by the defendant in respect of Madina Masjid Shalimar Village, Delhi located in Khasra No.12, Railway Line Road, and for permanent injunction for restraining the defendant from appointing any Mutwalli / Managing Committee of the said Masjid.
2. As per case of the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs along with other persons purchased the area measuring 65.5 x 22' out of Khasra No.12 Gali No.9, situated in village Shalimar Delhi 110088 from Sh. Mohd. Ali Daraz vide various documents i.e. GPA and Receipt for consideration and thereafter the Masjid namely Madina Masjid was formed in the said property and the public at large started offering Namaj in the said masjid. It is further alleged that for proper welfare of the said masjid the plaintiffs and other purchasers along with other member formed a Trust namely "Rafiq e Milat Welfare Trust" which was duly Page No.2 CS No.778/11 Iqbal Alam & Anr. Vs Delhi Wakf Board registered with the Sub Registrar Delhi on 26.11.05 and plaintiff No.1 is the General Secretary and the plaintiff No.2 is the Vice President of the said trust. The relevant document regarding the said trust have been annexed with the plaint. It is further alleged that later on the intention of some of the members of the said trust became dishonest and they themselves applied for registration of the said property with Delhi Wakf Board without the consent and permission of the plaintiffs who are also bonafide owners of the said property and members of the said trust. It is further alleged that to execute the conspiracy, some anti social elements created some false and frivolous documents and applied for the registration of the said property with the Delhi Wakf Board and they concealed about the registration of Rafiq e Milat Welfare Trust. It is also alleged that the defendant on the basis of false and frivolous documents issued a certificate of registration vide Sr. No.364 (Wakf No.168) dtd.26.02.09 without verifying any date of the documents and without considering the fact that the actual owners of the said property had not applied for the said registration. The plaintiffs came to Page No.3 CS No.778/11 Iqbal Alam & Anr. Vs Delhi Wakf Board know about the said registration and they filed their objections with the defendant on 25.08.10. it is also alleged that the persons who got the said registration certificate from Delhi Wakf Board were not having any execlusive right title or interest in the said property and they were not entitled to get the property registered with the defendant without the consent and permission of the plaintiffs. It is therefore, alleged that the said registration certificate of Delhi Wakf Board with respect of suit property which has been issued in illegal and arbitrary manner may be declared as null and void and the same may be cancelled.
3. The defendant was summoned and Sh. Faiz Ahmad Ld. counsel appeared on behalf of defendant i.e. Delhi Wakf Board but no written statment(WS) was filed and the defence of the defendant was struck off vide order dated 05.01.2013.
4. The plaintiff Iqbal Alam examined himself as PW1 and he tendered his evidence by way of affidavit vide Ex. PW1/A and he relied upon the contents of Page No.4 CS No.778/11 Iqbal Alam & Anr. Vs Delhi Wakf Board the plaint and documents i.e. the GPA and Receipts of the suit property as Ex.PW1/1, the registration document of Rafiq e Milat Welfare Trust as MarkA, the certified copy of certificate of registration of the property with Delhi Wakf Board vide Sr. No.364 (Wakf No.168) dtd.26.02.09 as Ex.PW1/3, the certified copy of the objections filed by the plaintiffs as Ex.PW1/4, the certified copy of the Status report filed by Delhi Wakf Board dtd.18.08.12 as Ex.PW1/5. During his cross examination PW1 has deposed that he had not given his share in the suit property to Delhi Wakf Board. He also stated that the suit property is a joint property and he has given request/objections for cancellation of registration of Wakf No.168 in respect of the suit property. He admitted that no Mutwalli had been appointed by the Wakf Board to take care of the suit property till date.
5. Plaintiff No.2 Mubeen Khan examined himself as PW2 and he also filed his evidence by way of affidavit which is Ex.PW2/A and he also relied upon the contents of the plaint and the documents i.e. the GPA and Receipts of the suit property as Ex.PW1/1, the registration document of Rafiq e Milat Welfare Trust Page No.5 CS No.778/11 Iqbal Alam & Anr. Vs Delhi Wakf Board as MarkA, the certified copy of certificate of registration of the property with Delhi Wakf Board vide Sr. No.364 (Wakf No.168) dtd.26.02.09 as Ex.PW1/3, the certified copy of the objections filed by the plaintiffs as Ex.PW1/4, the certified copy of the Status report filed by Delhi Wakf Board dtd.18.08.12 as Ex.PW1/5. During his cross examination PW2 has deposed that he has not given his share in respect of the suit property to Wakf Board and suit property is a joint property. He also admitted that he had filed objections for cancellation of registration of Wakf No.168 in respect of the suit property and no Mutwalli had been appointed by the Wakf Board to take care of the suit property till date. No other witness was examined by either of the parties.
6. I have heard arguments and perused the material available on record. Ld counsel for the plaintiff has argued that the plaintiffs are the coowner of the suit property i.e. property measuring 62.5 x 22' out of Khasra No.12 Gali No.9 situated in village Shalimar, Delhi 88 as per the documents Ex.PW1/1 and as per the evidence on record they have not given their shares in respect of the suit Page No.6 CS No.778/11 Iqbal Alam & Anr. Vs Delhi Wakf Board property to the defendant i.e. Delhi Wakf Board. It is also argued that as the suit property is a joint property the same could not have been registered with Wakf Board without consent of the plaintiffs who are the coowners thereof. Ld. counsel for the plaintiffs also argued that the defendant has failed to file the WS and even during the cross examination of the plaintiffs no question to challenge the case of the plaintiffs has been asked. It is therefore, submitted that the suit filed by the plaintiffs may be decreed.
7. Sh. Faiz Ahmad Ld. counsel for the defendant has submitted that the status report has already been filed by the Wakf Board vide which it is stated that the certificate issued to Madina Masjid Gali No.9, Shalimar Village, i.e. the suit property is under objection/challenge by Rafiq e Milat Welfare Trust and the aforesaid certificate bearing Vol No.7 page No.170 and registration No.168, dtd. 26.02.09 has not legal sanctity till the final decision of the objections. It is also stated that the Mutwalli has not been appointed. During arguments Ld. counsel for the defendant did not dispute that the suit property is jointly owned by the Page No.7 CS No.778/11 Iqbal Alam & Anr. Vs Delhi Wakf Board plaintiffs and they have not consented for registration of the said property with Delhi Wakf Board i.e. the defendant. No other argument has been raised by the Ld. counsel for the defendant.
8. In the present case the plaintiffs have prayed for cancellation of the registration certificate bearing number 364 of Wakf number 168 dated 26.02.09 vide which the suit property was given in Wakf to the defendant i.e Delhi Wakf Board. Therefore, vide present suit the plaintiffs wish to oust the claim of Delhi Wakf Board over the suit property which has already been registered and given in Wakf. The plaintiffs have also prayed for a decree of permanent injunction for restraining the defendant from appointing any Mutwalli/Managing committee of Wakf property i.e Madina Masjid, Shalimar Village, Delhi i.e. suit property. Section 85 of The Wakf Act, 1995 bars the jurisdiction of Civil Courts and it states that "no suit or other legal proceeding shall lie in any Civil Court in respect of any dispute, question or other matters relating to any Wakf, Wakf property or other matter which is required by or under this Act to be determined Page No.8 CS No.778/11 Iqbal Alam & Anr. Vs Delhi Wakf Board by a Tribunal".
9. Section 83 of The Wakf Act, 1995 provides that the State Government shall constitute the Tribunals for the determination of any dispute, question or other matter relating to the Wakf or Wakf property under this Act. Further Sub Section (5) of Section 83 provides that the Tribunal shall be deemed to be a Civil Court and shall have the same powers as may be exercised by a Civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure. Further SubSection (7) of Section 83 provides that the decision of the Tribunal shall be final and binding upon the parties.
10. In the case in hand the property has admittedly been given in Wakf to the defendant Delhi Wakf Board and consequently the suit property is a Wakf property and any dispute relating to any Wakf property can be heard or decided by the Tribunal constituted u/s 83 of The Wakf Act 1995 and the jurisdiction of this Court is specifically barred by virtue of Section 85 of The Wakf Act. In Mohd Nauman & others Vs Abdul Moeed & others(FAO 26264/2005 decided on Page No.9 CS No.778/11 Iqbal Alam & Anr. Vs Delhi Wakf Board 02.11.10) Hon'ble Delhi High Court also held similarly that the jurisdiction of Civil Court with respect to any Wakf property is barred. Similar view was taken by Madras High Court in P.M Vankatachalapathy & others Vs. Syed Anwar & others.
11. Another prayer made by the plaintiffs is that the defendant may also be restrained from appointing Mutwali/Managing Committee in respect of the Wakf property i.e the suit property in question. As per The Wakf Act 1995, the Mutwali/Managing Committee can be appointed by the Wakf Board u/s 32 of The Wakf Act, 1995 to take care of the properties of the Wakf. Section 83(2) of The Wakf Act, 1995 provides that any Mutwali, person interested in a Wakf or any other person aggrieved by an order made under this Act, or rules made thereunder, may make an application to the Tribunal for the determination of any dispute, question or other matter relating to the Wakf. And Section 85 specifically bars the jurisdiction of a Civil Court with respect to the matters which is required by or under this Act to be determined by a Tribunal. Page No.10 CS No.778/11
Iqbal Alam & Anr. Vs Delhi Wakf Board
12. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that this Court does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the prayers made in the plaint as the jurisdiction of this Court is specifically barred by virtue of Section 85 of The Wakf Act, 1995.
13. Hence, the suit filed by the plaintiffs is hereby dismissed. Decree sheet be drawn accordingly. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in the open (Manish Khurana)
Court on 01.04.2014 JSCCcumASCJcumGudn. Judge
North, Rohini Courts, Delhi
Page No.11
CS No.778/11
Iqbal Alam & Anr. Vs Delhi Wakf Board
07.02.14
Present : Ld. counsel for the plaintiff.
None for the defendants.
Vide separate judgment announced in the open court the suit of the plaintiff is hereby decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against both the defendants. Decree sheet be drawn accordingly. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
(Manish Khurana) JSCCcumASCJcumGudn. Judge North, Rohini Courts, Delhi 07.02.2014 Page No.12