Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Bengali Peer Dargah Karadga, represented by its Mutawalli Malangsha Guru Gulzarsha Fakeer, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order dated 28.07.2014 passed by the Karnataka Wakf Tribunal, Belgaum, dismissing KWT.BIJ.SR.No.3/2007. The petitioner had filed a suit before the Tribunal seeking a decree of perpetual injunction against respondent No.1, Usman Karim Mulla, restraining him from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of a property claimed to be wakf property. The Tribunal dismissed the suit on the ground that it was not maintainable. The High Court, after hearing the parties, upheld the Tribunal's order. The Court held that under Section 6(1) of the Wakf Act, 1995, if any question arises whether a particular property is wakf property or not, the Wakf Board or the Mutawalli must apply to the Tribunal for a decision. However, the suit was filed by the Mutawalli without impleading the Wakf Board and without obtaining any authorization from the Board. The Court noted that the Wakf Board is a necessary party in any dispute regarding wakf property, and the Mutawalli cannot maintain a suit on behalf of the wakf without the Board's consent. The Court also observed that the Tribunal's jurisdiction under Section 83 of the Act is limited to disputes specified under the Act, and a suit for injunction without impleading the Board is not maintainable. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, affirming the Tribunal's order.
Headnote
A) Wakf Law - Maintainability of Suit - Section 6(1) of Wakf Act, 1995 - Suit for perpetual injunction filed by Mutawalli against third party - Held that the suit is not maintainable as the Wakf Board is a necessary party and the Mutawalli must obtain authorization from the Board before filing such a suit (Paras 3-5).
B) Wakf Law - Jurisdiction of Tribunal - Section 83 of Wakf Act, 1995 - Dispute regarding wakf property - Held that the Tribunal has jurisdiction only over disputes specified under the Act, and a suit for injunction without impleading the Board is not within its purview (Para 4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a suit for perpetual injunction filed by a Mutawalli in the Wakf Tribunal is maintainable without impleading the Wakf Board and without obtaining prior authorization from the Board.
Final Decision
Writ petition dismissed. Order dated 28.07.2014 passed by Karnataka Wakf Tribunal, Belgaum, in KWT.BIJ.SR.No.3/2007 is upheld.
Law Points
- Wakf Act
- 1995
- Section 6(1)
- Section 83
- Section 85
- jurisdiction of Wakf Tribunal
- maintainability of suit by Mutawalli without Board authorization
- impleadment of Wakf Board as necessary party
Case Details
2015 LawText (KAR) (02) 42
Writ Petition No.108325/2014 (GM-WAKF)
Sri Sachin S Magadum for petitioner, Sri M G Naganuri for respondent 1, Sri Sadiq N Goodwala for respondent 2
Bengali Peer Dargah Karadga by its Mutawalli Malangsha Guru Gulzarsha Fakeer
Mr. Usman Karim Mulla and CEO Karnataka State Board of Wakf
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India challenging order of Karnataka Wakf Tribunal dismissing suit for perpetual injunction.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of Tribunal order dated 28.07.2014 dismissing KWT.BIJ.SR.No.3/2007.
Filing Reason
Petitioner's suit for perpetual injunction against respondent No.1 was dismissed by Tribunal as not maintainable.
Previous Decisions
Karnataka Wakf Tribunal, Belgaum, dismissed KWT.BIJ.SR.No.3/2007 on 28.07.2014.
Issues
Whether a suit for perpetual injunction filed by a Mutawalli in the Wakf Tribunal is maintainable without impleading the Wakf Board and without obtaining prior authorization from the Board.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the suit was maintainable and the Tribunal erred in dismissing it.
Respondents contended that the suit was not maintainable as the Wakf Board was not impleaded and no authorization was obtained.
Ratio Decidendi
A suit for perpetual injunction filed by a Mutawalli in the Wakf Tribunal without impleading the Wakf Board and without obtaining prior authorization from the Board is not maintainable under Section 6(1) of the Wakf Act, 1995.
Judgment Excerpts
Challenge in this writ petition is to an order dated 28.07.2014 passed by the Karnataka Wakf Tribunal, Belgaum, dismissing KWT.BIJ.SR.No.3/2007.
The suit filed by the petitioner was for perpetual injunction against respondent No.1 from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property.
The Tribunal dismissed the suit on the ground that it was not maintainable.
Under Section 6(1) of the Wakf Act, 1995, if any question arises whether a particular property is wakf property or not, the Wakf Board or the Mutawalli must apply to the Tribunal for a decision.
The suit was filed by the Mutawalli without impleading the Wakf Board and without obtaining any authorization from the Board.
Procedural History
Petitioner filed suit KWT.BIJ.SR.No.3/2007 before Karnataka Wakf Tribunal, Belgaum, seeking perpetual injunction. Tribunal dismissed suit on 28.07.2014. Petitioner filed writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India before High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, which was dismissed on 26.02.2015.
Acts & Sections
- Wakf Act, 1995: Section 6(1), Section 83, Section 85
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
