Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana)
Chowk Mosque, Nandyal, By Mutavalli ... vs P.V.H. Maqbal Basha And Others on 20 November, 1998
Equivalent citations: 1999(1)ALD396, 1999(1)ALT310, 1999 A I H C 1758, (1999) 1 ANDH LT 310, (1999) 1 ANDHLD 396, (1999) 1 CURCC 622
ORDER
1. The Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order in IA No.985 of 1997 in OS No.469 of 1997 passed by the Principal District Munsif, Nandyal. The plaintiff is the petitioner.
2. The plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the construction of shops in the mosque premises. Pending disposal of the suit, the petitioner filed IA No.985 of 1997 for temporary injunction. The defendants filed a counter affidavit opposing the petition for temporary injunction on the following grounds:
(1) That the Civil Judge has no jurisdiction as the matter relates to Wakf Property; and (2) That the prayer hall gets reduced if shops are allowed to be constructed in the mosque premises.
3. The learned District Munsif, Nandyal held that in view of Section 83 of the A.P. Wakf Act, 1995 (for short 'the Act'), the Civil Courts have no jurisdiction to entertain the matters relating to wakf property. Aggrieved by the same, the present CRP is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
4. The question to be considered in this Revision Petition is whether the Civil Courts have no jurisdiction to entertain the suit on the facts of the present case. Admittedly, it is a suit filed for injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the construction of shops in the mosque premises. Section 3 (r) of the Act defines 'Wakf' as a permanent dedication by a person professing Islam, of any movable or immovable property for any purpose recognised by the Muslim Law as pious, religious or charitable. Section 6 of the Act provides for disputes regarding Wakfs; reads as follows:
"Disputes regarding Wakfs :--(1) If any question arises whether a particular property specified as Wakf Property in the list of Wakfs is Wakf Property or not or whether a Wakf specified in such list is a Shia Wakf or Sunni Wakf, the Board or the Mutawalli of the Wakf or any person interested therein may institute a suit in Tribunal for the decision of the question and the decision of the Tribunal in respect of such matter shall be final".
Section 7 of the Act provides for the power of the Tribunal to determine disputes regarding Wakfs and it reads as under:
"7. Power of Tribunal lo determine disputes regarding Wakfs:-- (1) If, after the commencement of this Act, any question arises, whether a particular property specified as Wakf Property in a list of Wakfs is Wakf Property or not, or whether a Wakf specified in such list is a Shia Wakf or a Sunni Wakf, the Board or the Mutawalli of the Wakf, or any person interested therein, may apply to the Tribunal having jurisdiction in relation to such property, for the decision of the question and the decision of the Tribunal thereon shall be final."
Section 83 of the act provides for Constitution of Tribunals, etc., the relevant part of which reads as under:
"83. Constitution of Tribunals, etc :--(1) The State Government shall by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute as many Tribunals as it may think fit, for the determination of any dispute, question or other matter relating to a Wakf or Wakf Property under this Act and define the local limits and jurisdiction under this Act of each of such Tribunal."
The other provisions are not relevant for the purpose of deciding the present CRP.
5. Section 6 of the Act makes it clear that if any question arises whether a particular property specified as Wakf Property in the list of Wakfs is Wakf Property or not, then a suit should be instituted in the Tribunal constituted under Section 83 of the Act. In other words if there is a dispute as to the nature of the property namely whether it is a wakf property or not or whether it is Shia or Sunni wakf, then such dispute shall be resolved by the Tribunal constituted under the Act. If there is no dispute as to the nature of the property i.e., whether it is wakf or whether it is Shia or Sunni wakf then the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to deal with it. Admittedly, on the facts of the present case, there is no dispute as to the nature of the property as it is admitted by both the parties that it is a wakf property. Therefore, the question of instituting a suit in the Tribunal does not arise. Since, in this case there is no dispute regarding the nature of the property and the only dispute is whether the defendants are entitled to interfere with the construction of shops in the mosque premises, it is a civil dispute and the Civil Courts alone have jurisdiction and not the Tribunal constituted under Section 83 of the Act. Therefore, the learned Principal District Munsif has failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in him in holding that the Civil Courts have no jurisdiction to try the suit.
6. The CRP is, therefore, allowed and the impugned order is set-aside. The Principal District Munsif, Nandyal is directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible. He is also directed to decide the IA No.985 of 1997 on merits within 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.