Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.22 seconds)Section 26 in The Wakf Act, 1995 [Entire Act]
Section 28 in The Wakf Act, 1995 [Entire Act]
Nawab Zain Yar Jung And Others vs The Director Of Endowments And Others on 9 April, 1962
Board Of Muslim Wakfs, Rajasthan vs Radha Krishna & Ors on 24 October, 1978
These authorities are not applicable to the facts of this case and the petitioners are not entitled to the reliefs sought for in this writ petition. On the other hand, reliance placed by the learned Counsel for the Wakf Board on the decisions in M.C. Mehta's case, supra and Board of Muslim Wakfs, Rajasthan v Radha Kishan and Others, are applicable to the facts of the case.
Masud Khan vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 26 September, 1973
Shah Mansur Peer Dargah And Anr. vs State Of Karnataka And Ors. on 1 January, 1980
C.S. Mohan vs Inspecting Assistant Commissioner on 2 June, 1989
The order sheet of the said proceedings reveals that on 27-4-1995 the case was adjourned to 10-5-1995 at 3-00 p.m. In view of this, it was not open for the petitioners to state that no date was given on 27-4-1995 or to contend that the first petitioner could not attend on the date of passing the impugned order since the notice was served on the very same date at 12-00 noon. Shaik Ismail was very much present on 27-4-1995 and he had the knowledge of date of hearing on 10-5-1995. Thus, the writ petition is also liable to be dismissed for having made false statements or suppression of true facts. The learned Counsel for the second respondent-Wakf Board has rightly placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court in C.S. Mohan v Assistant Commissioner, Chikkaballapur and Others1, and M.C. Mehta v Un-ion of India and Others2 and submitted that this Court should not entertain this writ petition.
Mirza Habib Aga vs Karnataka Board Of Wakfs And Others on 5 December, 1989
1