Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The present revision petition has been filed challenging the order dated 01.09.2017 passed by the Tribunal (constituted under Section 83 of the Wakf Act, 1995), Kapurthala.

The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for permanent injunction and mandatory injunction for restraining the defendant-petitioner from interfering in the peaceful possession of the plaintiff-respondent over the premises measuring 2288.22 sq. yards as fully described in the plaint. It was averred in the plaint that the plaintiff-respondent was inducted as lessee in the suit property by executing a lease deed dated 15.02.2003 w.e.f. 01.01.2003. It was further averred that the plaintiff-respondent was inducted @ Rs.6000/- per month and since 01.01.2003 it is in continuous possession of the suit property. It was further averred that the plaintiff-respondent has been regularly paying the lease money to the defendant-petitioner but the defendant-petitioner has not accepted the lease money after the year 2014. It was averred that though there is a specific bar created vide the Wakf (Amendment) Act, 2013 for leasing out the property without the permission integrity of this order/judgment.

Vide judgment dated 01.09.2017 the suit was decreed. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision petition has been filed by the defendant-petitioner.

Learned counsel for the defendant-petitioner would contend that the lease deed had no automatic renewal clause as is apparent from a perusal of the lease order. It is further the contention that after the coming into force of the Wakf (Amendment) Act, 2013 there could be no leasing out of the property without the prior permission of the Board and that the status of the plaintiff-respondent was that of an encroacher. Learned counsel for the defendant-petitioner would further contend that the only ground on which the suit has been decreed is that it was not shown to the Court as to whether the Wakf (Amendment) Act, 2013 was retrospective or prospective integrity of this order/judgment.

in nature. It is submitted that no finding qua the applicability of the Wakf (Amendment) Act, 2013 was warranted in a simpliciter suit for injunction.

Per contra learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondent has contended that the Wakf (Amendment) Act, 2013 is not retrospective in nature and hence would not apply to the lease deed in favour of the plaintiff- respondent. It is submitted that since the plaintiff-respondent is a lessee the defendant-petitioner cannot forcibly evict it from the suit property.

integrity of this order/judgment.

However, keeping in view the discussion by the Tribunal on the applicability or inapplicability of the Wakf (Amendment) Act, 2013, the instant revision petition is disposed off with a direction that the plaintiff- respondent, who is in possession of the suit property under the Wakf Board, would not be evicted therefrom except in due course of law. The discussion in the impugned order regarding the applicability or inapplicability of the provisions of the Wakf (Amendment) Act, 2013 is held to be obiter dicta and the question is left open to be determined in appropriate proceedings.