Case Note & Summary
The appeal arose from a representative suit filed by Abdul Karim Khan and others, residents of Nayapara Ward and the Muslim community of Raipur, seeking an injunction restraining the Municipal Committee, Raipur from encroaching on a plot of land known as Fazle Karim's Bada. The appellants claimed the plot was an old Kabrasthan called Chuchu's Takia, a permanent inalienable wakf property with tombs of saints and annual Urs ceremonies. They contended that the plot had been registered as property of a public trust under the Madhya Pradesh Public Trusts Act, 1951, and therefore the respondent had no right to construct on it. The respondent Municipal Committee denied the wakf character, asserted that the land originally belonged to private persons, was acquired by Government in 1910-11, transferred to the respondent in 1922, and had been used for schools, with rent paid since 1932-33. The trial court dismissed the suit, the first appellate court confirmed, and the High Court dismissed the second appeal. The only issue before the Supreme Court was whether the entry in the register of public trusts under the Act was final and conclusive against the respondent. The Court examined the scheme of the Act, particularly Sections 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9. It held that the enquiry under Section 5 is limited to whether a trust is public or private and does not extend to determining title of property claimed by a private individual. Only persons interested in the public trust, as defined by Section 5(2), are required to file objections; a person disputing the existence of trust or claiming property as its absolute owner is not such a person. Therefore, the respondent was not a party to the proceedings and could not have filed objections or availed the remedies under Section 4(5) or Section 8(1). Consequently, the finality of the Registrar's order did not bind the respondent, and the registration entry did not affect the respondent's title. The appeal was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Public Trust Law - Scope of Registrar's Enquiry - Section 5(1) read with Sections 4(3), 5(2) Madhya Pradesh Public Trusts Act, 1951 - The enquiry contemplated by the Act is an enquiry into whether a trust is public or private and does not include questions of title to property claimed by a private individual as absolute owner; only persons interested in the public trust are required to file objections, not persons disputing existence of trust or claiming property as private owner. Held that respondent Municipal Committee was not such a person interested in the public trust and could not have filed objections before the Registrar. (Paras not mentioned)
B) Public Trust Law - Conclusiveness of Registrar's Order - Sections 4(5), 7(2), 8(1), 9(3) Madhya Pradesh Public Trusts Act, 1951 - The finality given to the findings of the Registrar under the Act operates only against parties and persons interested in the trust who had opportunity to contest; a third party claiming title as absolute owner is not bound by the registration entry and can assert title in civil suit; the fact that property was added to the list of trust properties does not affect the real owner's title. Held that appellants could not rely on registration to bar respondent's defence and the appeal was dismissed. (Paras not mentioned)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the entry made by the Registrar of Public Trusts under the Madhya Pradesh Public Trusts Act, 1951, that the suit property belonged to a public trust, was final and conclusive against the respondent Municipal Committee, which was not a party to the registration proceedings and had not filed objections or a suit.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. The registration entry under the Madhya Pradesh Public Trusts Act, 1951 did not affect the respondent's title to the suit property. The enquiry under the Act is limited to whether a trust is public or private and does not include questions of title of property claimed by private individuals. The respondent was not a person interested in the public trust under Section 5(2) and was not bound by the finality of the Registrar's order under Sections 4(5) and 8(1).
Law Points
- Enquiry under M.P. Public Trusts Act is limited to whether trust is public or private
- not title of private property
- Registration entry does not affect real owner's title
- Only persons interested in public trust can object
- Third party not bound by registrar's order
- Finality under sections 4(5) and 8(1) not available against non-party
- Order 1 Rule 8 CPC representative suit
Case Details
1965 LawText (SC) (03) 12
Civil Appeal No. 871 of 1962
P.B. Gajendragadkar, Raghubar Dayal, V. Ramaswami
1965 AIR 1744, 1965 SCR (3) 300
S.P. Sinha, M.I. Khowaja, S.T. Desai, A.G. Ratnaparkhi
Abdul Karim Khan and Ors.
Municipal Committee, Raipur
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil suit for permanent injunction restraining respondent Municipal Committee from committing acts of encroachment on suit plot claimed as wakf property, filed in representative capacity under Order 1 Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Remedy Sought
Appellants sought an injunction restraining respondent from committing acts of encroachment on their rights and the rights of Muslim community in holding Urs and other ceremonies on the plot.
Filing Reason
Respondent started digging foundation on the plot on or about 22 October 1956 intending to construct another school building; appellants claimed the property was wakf and served notice; on non-compliance, they filed the suit on 29 October 1956.
Previous Decisions
Trial court dismissed the suit, holding that the registration entry was not conclusive against the respondent; first appellate court confirmed the dismissal; High Court of Madhya Pradesh dismissed the second appeal by judgment dated 13 August 1959; hence appeal by special leave to Supreme Court.
Issues
Whether the entry made by the Registrar of Public Trusts under the Madhya Pradesh Public Trusts Act, 1951, that the suit property belonged to a public trust, was final and conclusive against the respondent Municipal Committee, which was not a party to the registration proceedings and had not filed objections or a suit.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellants argued that the suit plot was registered as property of the public trust under the Act; respondent did not file objections before the Registrar or suit under Section 8(1) within specified time; therefore the order of the Registrar should be held final and conclusive against the respondent.
Respondent contended that the land was never wakf property; originally belonged to private persons and was acquired by Government in 1910-11; respondent got the land from Government in 1922; Deputy Commissioner fixed rent in 1932-33 which respondent paid since; respondent constructed schools and used land for public purposes; alleged tombs were insignificant and Urs of recent origin allowed under licence; respondent had full right to construct.
Ratio Decidendi
The enquiry under the Madhya Pradesh Public Trusts Act, 1951 is confined to determining whether a trust is public or private and does not extend to adjudicating title disputes with persons claiming the property as private owners. Only persons interested in the public trust are required to file objections under Section 5(2); a person disputing the existence of trust or claiming property as absolute owner is not such a person and is not bound by the Registrar's order or the finality under Sections 4(5) and 8(1). Registration entry adding property to trust register does not affect the real owner's title.
Judgment Excerpts
The enquiry which the Act contemplates is an enquiry into the question as to whether a trust is public or private and does not take within its sweep questions as to whether a property belongs to a private individual and is not the subject matter of any trust at all.
The only persons who are required to file their objections in proceedings before the Registrar are persons interested in the public trust--not persons who dispute the existence of the trust or who challenge the allegation that any property belongs to the said trust.
Inasmuch as the respondent was not a party to the proceedings and could not have filed any objections in the proceedings the respondent was not bound to file an appeal under s. 4(5) of the Act or a suit under s. 8(1), challenging order of the Registrar.
The fact that the property in suit was added to the list of the properties belonging to the trust, could not affect the respondent’s title to it.
Procedural History
Suit filed on 29 October 1956 under Order 1 Rule 8 CPC before trial court; trial court dismissed the suit; first appellate court confirmed dismissal; High Court of Madhya Pradesh dismissed second appeal by judgment dated 13 August 1959; appeal by special leave to Supreme Court (Civil Appeal No. 871 of 1962).
Acts & Sections
- Madhya Pradesh Public Trusts Act, 1951: Section 2(4), Section 2(8), Section 2(9), Section 3(1), Section 3(2), Section 4(1), Section 4(3), Section 4(4), Section 4(5), Section 4(6), Section 5(1), Section 5(2), Section 6, Section 7, Section 7(2), Section 8(1), Section 9(1), Section 9(2), Section 9(3), Section 35
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order 1 Rule 8
