Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(b) It is stated that the scheme decree was complied smoothly for over decades but the trouble started only in 1985, when the children of the above said Baba Mohiuddin viz., Shaik Ahmed and Shaik Ilyas entered into void agreements of sale with Defendants 1 to 4 and conveyed the fake title under four registered sale deeds and the defendants filed eviction cases, which are pending as R.C.Cs. 20 to 36 of 1986 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Rajahmundry.

(c) It is further stated that the Andhra Pradesh Wakf Board has jurisdiction over the plaint schedule property. The defendants fraudulently in collusion with the unauthorized persons who had no right to alienate the Wakf property without the consent of the Wakf Board obtain sale deeds and even the Wakf Board has no right to sell the 'said property except under special circumstances as provided under Section 36-B read with Rule 12 of the Andhra Pradesh Wakf Rules. Therefore, the alienations of Wakf property between the parties are not binding on the Wakf Board. The general superintendence of all Wakfs in the State is vested in the Wakf Board under Section 15 of the Wakf Act, 1954 and it is the duty of the Wakf Board to exercise its powers under the Act to ensure that the Wakfs under its superintendence are properly maintained, controlled and administered and the income thereof is duly applied with the object for the purpose for which such Wakfs are created. The alienations are liable to set aside and the Wakf Board is entitled to take possession and management of the suit schedule property.

36. It is stated that the lease deed Ex. B5 executed in 1945 and sale deeds made in favour of the defendants are all illegal and invalid and have no force of law. The possession of the vendors of the defendants is only permissive possession and not independent or adverse to the trust. The property in question is not ancestral property of the vendors of the defendants and the action of the trustee Baba Mohiuddin is nothing but breach of trust and once it is a Wakf property it is always a Wakf property and therefore, any alienation without the sanction of the Wakf Board is null and void. Therefore, Ex. B4 judgment does not operate as res judicata and it has no force of law in view of Ex. A4 judgment.