Disposed

Asadulla Khan v. Sri Syed Shafiulla

Karnataka HC14 Aug 2024RSA/1051/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second appeal concerning scheduled property admitted to be Wakf property. The Court upheld the First Appellate Court's jurisdictional finding that the suit was barred under Sections 83 and 85 of the Wakf Act and disposed of the appeal, relegating appellants to approach the competent Wakf Tribunal/Authority.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed of; appellants relegated to competent Wakf Tribunal; interim order continued for two months from receipt of certified copy.

Asadulla Khan Vs Sri Syed Shafiulla — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:33183 RSA No. 1051 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1051 OF 2022 (INJ)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

ASADULLA KHAN,

¶9

S/O LATE HAYATH KHAN, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS.

¶10

JAFRULLA KHAN, S/O ASADULLA KHAN, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, A.K. AUTO ENGINEERING, WORKS, FIRST CROSS, GARDEN AREA, SHIVAMOGGA.

¶11

BOTH ARE R/AT SAVAI PALYA, JAMBOO MOHALLA, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 202.

¶12

Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S Location: High (BY SRI. BALAGANGADHAR G S., ADVOCATE) Court of Karnataka

¶13

…APPELLANTS

¶14

AND:

¶15

SRI SYED SHAFIULLA, S/O SYED WAZEER JAN, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT KHAJI MOHALLA, 100 FEET ROAD, SHIVAMAGGA - 577 202.

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SRI. PRASAD B S., ADVOCATE)

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC:33183 RSA No. 1051 of 2022

¶20

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 24.02.2022 PASSED IN RA.No.17/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, SHIVAMOGGA, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 07.12.2019 PASSED IN OS No.632/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SHIVAMOGGA.

¶21

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

¶23

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶24

After arguing for sometimes by Sri. Balagangadhar G.S., learned counsel appearing for the appellants, Sri. Prasad B.S., learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that, the suit itself is not maintainable as there is bar under Sections 83 and 85 of Wakf Act, 1995.

¶25

In the backdrop of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties as there is no dispute that the schedule property is Wakf property and

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:33183 RSA No. 1051 of 2022

¶27

therefore, the finding recorded by the First Appellate Court with regard to the jurisdictional aspects is just and proper. Therefore, I am of the view that, appellants be relegated to approach the Competent Tribunal/Authority for redressal of this grievance.

¶28

In the light of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dhulabhai And Others v/s The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Another, reported in AIR 1969 SC 78 and in the case of Rashid Wali Beg v/s Farid Pindari and Others reported in (2022) 4 SCC 414, appeal is disposed of, in terms of the observation made above.

¶29

It is needless to say that, this Court vide order 26.09.2023, has extended the interim order in favour of

¶30

the appellants and same shall continue for two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, to enable the appellants to take appreciate steps in the matter, in the light of the observation made above.

¶31

¶32

NC: 2024:KHC:33183 RSA No. 1051 of 2022

¶33

Registry is directed to send back the records

¶34

immediately.

¶35

SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

¶36

TMP