Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

44. On perusal of the documents marked on the side of the Plaintiff under Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-19 and on the side of the Defendants under Ex.B-1 to Ex.B-4 and on perusal of the Judgment of the learned Wakf Tribunal, the learned Wakf Tribunal had on cogent analysis of the entire materials including oral evidence as well as the documentary evidence had arrived at a correct conclusion. The claim of the Plaintiff under Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-3 in favour of Fazilatunisa Begum was not established. The learned Wakf Tribunal had found that the Plaintiff claims right over the property based on the deed executed by the then Muthavalli of Soorsha Makkan. Under Mohammedan Law, Muthavalli are the management of Wakf and they were not given the power of alienation of the properties owned by Wakf. Abdul Samed Sahib was Muthavalli and Executor of Soorsha Makkan, whose name is incorporated in the Adangal Extract relating the property gifted by him. Further, there was no mention about the gift deed or as to how the said Samad Shabi acquired properties. Thus, the alienation of Wakf property by way of gift in favour of the said Fazilatunisa Begum cannot be accepted or it confers any title through a void transaction.