Allowed

Gurdip Kaur v. Punjab Wakf Board and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Oct 2011CR/1498/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge held that Wakf Tribunals lack jurisdiction to entertain suits for injunction against Wakf Boards, which belong in Civil Courts. The dismissed suits were restored, and the petitioner was directed to present them in the competent Civil Court.

What did the court decide?

The order dismissing the suits was set aside; the petitioner was directed to present the suits in the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction.

Gurdip Kaur Vs Punjab Wakf Board and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

C.R. No.1496 of 2008 (O&M)

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

C.R. No.1496 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision.03.10.2011

¶5

Sohan Singh son of Tota Singh

¶6

.....Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

Punjab Wakf Board through its Secretary and another.....Respondents

¶9

C.R. No.1498 of 2008 (O&M)

¶10

Gurdip Kaur wife of Atma Singh .....Petitioner

¶11

Versus

¶12

Punjab Wakf Board through its Secretary and another.....Respondents

¶13

Present: Mr. Ashok Singla, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶14

None for respondents.

¶15

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

¶16

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No

¶17

To be referred to the Reporters or not ? No

¶18

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No

¶19

-.-

¶20

K. KANNAN J.(ORAL)

¶21

Both the revision petitions are against the orders dismissing the suits filed before the Additional District Judge exercising jurisdiction as a Tribunal to the Wakf Act, 1985. The petitioners are aggrieved by the summary dismissal of the suit for injunction when the contention was that as tenants, they could not have been evicted except in due process of law.

¶22

The jurisdiction of a Tribunal is attracted only in situations where the issue is whether a particular property is wakf property or there is a dispute relating to the character of such property. The mere action for injunction in relation to the property belonging to wakf

¶23

-2-

¶24

C.R. No.1496 of 2008 (O&M)

¶25

against the Wakf Board will still be competent only before the normal Court of civil jurisdiction and cannot be instituted before the Wakf Tribunal as has been held recently in Ramesh Gobindram Vs. Humayuri Wakf (2010) 8 SCC 726 . The order passed will have to be modified for a different reason that the Wakf Tribunal itself will not have jurisdiction to entertain such a suit. Even while setting aside the order of dismissal already passed by the Court, I direct the Wakf Tribunal namely the District Court at Faridkot to return the papers to the petitioner for presentation in Civil court of competent jurisdiction.

¶26

The civil revisions are disposed of with the direction as above. Any observations made by the Tribunal will disposing of the case shall not in any way prejudice the court of competent jurisdiction if the case were to be filed as original suit.

¶27

(K. KANNAN) JUDGE

¶28

October 03, 2011 Pankaj*

Gurdip Kaur v. Punjab Wakf Board and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurdip Kaur v. Punjab Wakf Board and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surinder Singh etc. Vs F.C.(a) Pb.Chd.Etc.

Sandeep Singh Mann Vs P.O.L.C.Chd. and Another

Nand Ram S/O Ramu Vs F.C.Commissioner,Hy

Natha Singh Vs Sukhdev Singh

The Pb.Land Dev.& Rec.Corpn.Ltd. Vs P.O.L.C.Ut.Chd.Etc.

Sohan Singh Vs Punjab Wakf Board and Anr.