Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Punjab-Haryana High Court

(O&M) Raminder Kaur And Another vs Baba Deep Singh Ji Shahid Charitable ... on 16 January, 2023

Author: Alka Sarin

Bench: Alka Sarin

                            R-731
                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                                                   CHANDIGARH

                                                                                CR-2063-2008 (O&M)
                                                                          Date of decision : 16.01.2023


                            Raminder Kaur & Anr.                                            ... Petitioner(s)

                                                                Versus

                            Baba Deep Singh Ji Shahid Charitable Society & Ors.           ... Respondent(s)



                            CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN



                            Present :    Ms. Aeshna Jain, Advocate for the petitioners.

                                         Mr. B.S. Bedi, Advocate for the respondent nos.1 to 4.



                            ALKA SARIN, J. (ORAL)

In the present case, the plaintiff-respondents filed a suit for permanent injunction for restraining the defendant-petitioners from interfering in their peaceful and lawful possession over the suit land measuring 5 kanals 16 marlas. Thereafter, since the plaintiff-respondents were stated to have been dispossessed, the suit was converted into a suit for mandatory injunction for handing over the vacant possession of the suit land. Vide order dated 28.03.2007 the District Judge, Jalandhar put up the matter before the Tribunal under the Wakf Act, 1995. The matter was, thereafter, decided vide order dated 26.09.2007 by the Tribunal. Challenge in the present case is to the order passed by the Tribunal on the ground that the Tribunal did not have the jurisdiction to hear the case.

Heard.

2023.01.17 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

CR-2063-2008 (O&M) -2- Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Rashid Wali Beg Vs. Farid Pindari & Ors. [2021 (4) RCR (Civil) 718] has held as under :

"56. In the case on hand, the property is admitted to be a waqf property. Therefore, to allow the plaintiff to ignore the Waqf Tribunal and to seek a decree of permanent injunction and mandatory injunction from a civil court, would be ignore the mandate of section 83 and 85 which speak of any dispute, question or other matter relating to a waqf or a waqf property. There is also one more issue. In the written statement, the Defendant No.1 has admitted the existence of the waqf and also admitted that the father of the plaintiff by name Riyaz Ahmad is the mutawalli. But the claim of the plaintiff that he is the beneficiary of the waqf has been denied. Therefore, a question as to the nature of the waqf and whether the plaintiff is a beneficiary of the waqf, has also arisen in this case. This question has necessarily to be decided by the Tribunal and not the civil court."

In the present case, the undisputed fact is that the property is the wakf property. In view thereof, it cannot be said that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction.

In view of the above, the present revision petition is accordingly dismissed. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off.

( ALKA SARIN ) 16.01.2023 JUDGE Yogesh Sharma NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO YOGESH SHARMA 2023.01.17 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.