Partly allowed

The Superintendent of Police, Ahmednagar and Ors. v. Abid Hussain Mohd Hanif and Ors.

Bombay HC15 Jan 2014CRA/62/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Civil Revision Application challenging interim orders allowing construction on disputed Wakf property. The High Court modified the lower order to prohibit demolition of existing Muslim structures and equities on successful suit outcome.

What did the court decide?

Disposes Revision Application directing construction to be subject to suit outcome and prohibiting demolition of Muslim community structures.

The Superintendent of Police, Ahmednagar and Ors. Vs Abid… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

cra62.08

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.62 OF 2008

¶6

`1) The Superintendent of Police,` `Ahmednagar,`
`2) Public Works Department,` `Through its Executive Engineer,` `Ahmednagar,`
`3) The State of Maharashtra,` `Through its Collector,` `Ahmednagar,`
`4) The Police Inspector,` `Kotwali Police Station,` `Ahmednagar.` `...APPLICANTS`
`VERSUS`
`1) Abid Hussain s/o Mohd. Hanif,` `Age-34 years, Occu:Business,` `R/o-H.No.5173, Panchpeer Chawdi,` `Ahmednagar,`
`2) Shaikh Ansar Hameed,` `Age-34 years, Occu:Business,` `R/o-6127/28, Serjepura,` `Ahmednagar,`
`3) Shaikh Ayaz Mohd. Isaq,` `Age-35 years, Occu:Business,` `R/o-1692, Shanigalli,`
`Zandigate, Ahmednagar,`

¶7

cra62.08

¶8

¶9

4) Munaf Ibrahim Baghwan, Age-34 years, Occu:Business, R/o-1462, Panjrangalli, Ahmednagar,

¶10

5) Shaikh Nisar Abdul Razak Jagirdar, Age-39 years, Occu:Business, R/o-Rahim Bldg., Block No.1, Zandigate, Ahmednagar,

¶11

6) Shaikh Javed Ab. Rehman, Age-25 years, Occu:Business, R/o-Nasheman Colony, Mukundnagar, Ahmednagar, (Application dismissed against Respondent No.6 vide order dated 26th March, 2009)

¶12

7) Shaikh Salman Ahmed Babu, Age-35 years, Occu:Business, R/o-Backside Palthan Police Chowki, Ahmednagar,

¶13

8) Municipal Corporation, Ahmednagar, Through its Commissioner,

¶14

9) Maharashtra State Board of Wakfs, Through its Chief Executive Officer, Panchakki, Aurangabad.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

...

¶17

 Shri S.R. Palnitkar, A.G.P. for Applicants.
 Shri S.S. Kazi Advocate for Respondent Nos.1,
 to 5 and 7.

¶18

 Revision is dismissed against Respondent No.6.
 None present for Respondent Nos.8 and 9 though
 served.

¶19

...

¶20

cra62.08

¶21

¶22

CORAM: A.I.S. CHEEMA, J.

¶23

 DATE : 15TH JANUARY, 2014

¶24

ORAL JUDGMENT :

¶25

1. Heard learned A.G.P. for Applicants and

¶26

learned counsel Shri S.S. Kazi for Respondent Nos.

¶27

1 to 5 and 7. None present for Respondent Nos. 8

¶28

and 9.

¶29

2.Suit No.2 of 2008 was filed by Respondent

¶30

No.1 Abid Hussain and others in representative

¶31

capacity before Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal,
Aurangabad claiming restoration of possession of
land C.T.S. No.3849 admeasuring 748.3 Sq. Mtr. on

¶32

the ground that the lands were originally
dedicated for religious service of Wakf by name
Hussaini Mosque and Madrasa. Application Exhibit 5

¶33

in the Suit came to be filed for temporary
injunction. After hearing the parties, Presiding
Officer, Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad was

¶34

cra62.08

¶35

¶36

pleased to pass orders and temporarily restrained
Applicants, who are original Defendant Nos. 1
to 4, and Respondent No.8 (Original Defendant
No.5) from alienating or creating any third party
interest in respect of the suit property and from
causing damage to the structure of Hussaini Mosque
situated in C.T.S. No.3849 and Defendant Nos. 1 to
4 were restrained from making any construction
over the said property. Being aggrieved by the
said order, present Applicants filed this Revision
Application.

¶37

3.At the time of admitting present Revision
Application, this Court had granted interim
relief. Para 1 and 2 of the order dated 31st
March, 2008 reads as under:

¶38

"1. Admit.

¶39

2. Ad-interim relief in terms of
prayer clause (D). However, it is
made clear that the construction by

¶40

cra62.08

¶41

¶42

the applicant shall be subject to
the decision of the suit and that
the applicant shall not claim any
equities, in the event the plaintiff
succeeds in the suit. At the same
time, it is clarified that the
applicant shall not demolish any of
the structures situated on the suit
site claiming to be used by the
Muslim Community."

¶43

4.The learned A.G.P. as well as learned

¶44

Advocate Shri. Kazi, both submit that if the above
ad-interim order is confirmed, there would be no
difficulty and the concerned Suit before the Wakf
Tribunal may be expedited.

¶45

5.Perused the impugned order and the
record. Considered the submissions.

¶46

6.In the result, I pass following Order:

¶47

cra62.08

¶48

¶49

O R D E R

¶50

(I) This Revision Application is
disposed of with the direction that the
construction by the Applicants on the
suit property, shall be subject to the
decision of the Suit and the Revision
Applicants shall not claim any equities
in the event the original plaintiffs
succeed in the Suit. The Revision
Applicants shall not demolish any of the
structure situated on the suit site
claiming to be used by the Muslim
Community.

¶51

(II).The impugned order dated
16th February, 2008 passed below Exhibit
5 in Suit No.2 of 2008 by the Presiding
Officer, Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal,
Aurangabad is modified accordingly.

¶52

(III) Revision Application stands
disposed of.

¶53

 [A.I.S.CHEEMA,J.]

¶54

asb/JAN14

The Superintendent of Police, Ahmednagar and Ors. v. Abid Hussain Mohd Hanif and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Superintendent of Police, Ahmednagar and Ors. v. Abid Hussain Mohd Hanif and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Ganesh Ginning and Pressing and Ors. Vs Praveenkumar Bajranglal Agrawal

Pradip Pitambar Patil and Another Vs Sitaram Gulabchand Agrawal and Others

Baburao Ramji Mane Vs A.B. Patil and Others

Abhilasha Vijaykumar Wagh Vs Dr. Vijaykumar Gopinath Wagh

Subhash Anantgir Gosavi Vs Shivcharan Tulshiram Fokmare

Geeta Umesh Kanade Vs Umesh Tulshiram Kanade