Allowed

Balwinder Kumar v. Naresh Saini & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC8 Oct 2012CR/1374/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this revision petition under Article 227, the Court set aside the Wakf Tribunal's dismissal of a suit. Relying on Supreme Court precedent, the Court held that the Civil Court has jurisdiction over lease disputes involving Wakf property, not the Wakf Tribunal, and remanded the matter.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment and decree of the Wakf Tribunal set aside; matter remanded to District Judge, Panchkula; suit assigned to Civil Court.

Balwinder Kumar Vs Naresh Saini & Anr. — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CR NO.1374 OF 2011 DATE OF DECISION : 8th OCTOBER, 2012

Balwinder Kumar

…. Petitioner

Versus

Naresh Saini & another

¶7

…. Respondents

¶8

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL

¶9

¶10

Present : Mr. N. C. Kinra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S. K. Pruthi, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. Athar Ahmad, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶11

¶12

L. N. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

¶13

In this revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, plaintiff Balwinder Kumar has assailed order judgment and decree dated 08.12.2010 passed by Additional District Judge, Panchkula as Wakf Tribunal under the Wakf Act, 1995 (in short the ‘Act’), thereby dismissing plaintiff’s suit.

¶14

Plaintiff claimed that Prabhu Dayal father of plaintiff and defendant No.1 had taken the disputed plot on lease from defendant No.2 Haryana Wakf Board for 99 years in the year 1987 and constructed house thereon. Prabhu Dayal has since died. Plaintiff claimed lease hold rights in half share in the suit property.

¶15

Defendant No.1 while admitting that their father had taken the suit plot on lease from defendant No.2 and had constructed the house thereon pleaded that the property has now been leased out in favour of defendant No.1 by defendant No.2. Various other pleas were also raised.

¶16

CR NO.1374 OF 2011

¶17

- 2 -

¶18

Defendant No.2 also controverted the averments of the plaintiff. Learned Wakf Tribunal vide impugned judgment and decree dated 08.12.2010 has dismissed the suit of the plaintiff who has, therefore, filed this revision petition to challenge the said judgment and decree.

¶19

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file.

¶20

Counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner contended that Wakf Tribunal had no jurisdiction to try the suit as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh Gobindram (dead) through LRs versus Sugra Humayun Mirza Wakf, 2010(2) RCR (Rent) 266 .

¶21

The aforesaid contention of counsel for the petitioner has not been countered by any meaningful argument by counsel for respondents. It is undisputed that the disputed plot is Wakf property vesting in defendant No.2Wakf Board. Consequently jurisdiction to determine rights of plaintiff and defendant No.1 regarding lease of the disputed plot vests in Civil Court and not in Wakf Tribunal under the Act. This view finds support from judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Remesh Gobindram (supra). Since there is inherent lack of jurisdiction in the Wakf Tribunal, the impugned judgment and decree of the Wakf Tribunal have to be set aside.

¶22

Accordingly the instant revision petition is allowed. The impugned judgment and decree of the Wakf Tribunal are set aside. The matter is remanded to District Judge, Panchkula who shall assign the suit to Civil Court of competent jurisdiction for adjudication in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before learned District Judge, Panchkula on 09.11.2012.

¶23

CR NO.1374 OF 2011

¶24

- 3 -

¶25

8^th October, 2012 (L. N. MITTAL) ‘raj’ JUDGE

¶26

(L. N. MITTAL)

Balwinder Kumar v. Naresh Saini & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balwinder Kumar v. Naresh Saini & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naresh Vs Triveni Devi and Ors.

Ravinder Kumar Vs Ccs Hau Hisar and Anr.

(O&M) Parikshit Bhardwaj etc. Vs Ccs Hau, Hisar and Anr.

Balwinder Kumar Vs Naresh Saini etc.

(O&M) Priya Mishra Vs Ashutosh Mishra

K B Pawar Vs Surjit Singh & Ors.