Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

9. Mr. Chowdhury further contended that entries in the finally published LR record of rights would only indicate possession but such entries would not confer title. That once a wakf was created, its character could not be extinguished by any action of the mutawalli or anyone claiming through him. He relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Chhedi Lal Misra (dead) vs. Civil Judge, Lucknow & Ors., reported in (2007) 4 SCC 632. Next, he relied on the decision of M. Gurudas & Ors. vs. Rasaranjan & Ors. reported in (2006) 8 SCC 367, in support of his contention that the Tribunal having considered the prima facie case and the balance of convenience and inconvenience of the parties, ought to have allowed the application for injunction as the issues raised by the plaintiff were serious issues and the wakf property was being wasted, depleted, alienated and damaged.

12. He relied on the decision of Sayyed Ali & Ors. vs. Andhra Pradesh Wakf Board, reported in AIR 1998 SC 972, in order to reiterate the principle that 'once a wakf always a wakf' and any grant of patta to any other person would not nullify the earlier dedication of the property to the 'Almighty'. He submitted that after the wakf was created it would continue to be so for all times to come and would be governed by the provisions of the Wakf Act and any subsequent sale, transfer or alienation would not change the original character of the wakf property.

(iii) Clear possibility of irreparable injury being caused to plaintiff if the temporary injunction is not granted. In addition, temporary injunction being an equitable relief, the discretion to grant such relief will be exercised only when the plaintiff's conduct is free from blame and he approaches the court with clean hands."

38. Once it is prima facie established that the suit property was a wakf property and there is a doubt with regard to vesting, which can be proved only through evidence at the trial, it is necessary for the Court to interfere in this case, in order to protect the wakf property from further damage, wastage and alienation. The property being a wakf property, any transfer and alienation of the same is void under Section 51(1-A) of the Wakf Act, 1995. Unless the ongoing construction is stopped the entire nature and character of the suit property which prima facie appears to be wakf property will be extinguished. The plaintiff/petitioner has a good case to go to trial. The case of irreparable loss and injury has been made out by the petitioner. Entries in the finally published LR record of rights and those in the records of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation do not confer title. The presumption of correctness of the LR Records is rebuttable by evidence. The injury in this case is of such nature that the same cannot be compensated in terms of money and once the property is developed and alienated, even if the petitioner ultimately succeeds in the suit, the wakf property cannot be restored to its original position and the very nature and character of the wakf property would be completely extinguished and obliterated.