Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

12. Here, there is nothing placed before me to indicate that the properties referred to in the W.O.P., are the wakf properties and it is for the revision petitioners to produce before the Court necessary notification concerned and also the registered or any other documents to show that the first respondent is trying to dissipate and misappropriate the properties of the wakf. An injunction cannot be granted for the mere asking for it. I am fully aware of the fact that granting innocuous injunction that the first respondent should not alienate the wakf properties, might not be injurious to the first respondent, but the Court is not expected to grant such loosely worded injunction unless there is prima facie proof.

15. I would take it as an opportunity to mandate the Wakf Board to concentrate on this issue and do the needful and see that the properties of the wakf are protected. As such, as of now, over and above these observations, I do not like to give any other special directions. The point is answered accordingly.

16. While disposing of this Civil Revision Petition, I would like to give liberty to the revision petitioners to satisfy the Wakf Tribunal about the locus standi of the revision petitioners and also about the attempt on the part of the first respondent to alienate the wakf properties. On such evidence being placed before the Tribunal, it shall do the needful as per law. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.