9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
The judgment involves the creation and continuation of a wakf, challenge to the wakf properties, authority of the Deputy Commissioner to issue notice under the 1960 Act, and the transfer of wakf properties to a third party. Creation and Continuation of Wakfs: The case revolved around a wakf created by Mirza Mohammed Haider in 1926, registered under Section 38 of the U.P. Muslim Wakfs Act, 1936. The wakf, including the disputed property, was duly registered with the Board of Wakfs. The High Court upheld the creation of the wakf, emphasizing that once a wakf is established, the wakif loses title to the properties, which then vest in the Almighty perpetually. The court highlighted that the wakf registration and notification had not been challenged, affirming the validity of the wakf. Challenge to Wakf Properties: A suit was filed in 1958 by the Wakif against the Mutwalli, seeking to declare the properties in question as non-wakf. However, the suit was collusively decreed without involving the Board of Wakfs. Subsequently, the Wakif and the Mutwalli transferred the disputed plots to the appellant. The appellant argued that the wakf character of the properties was extinguished due to changes in revenue records and the decree obtained in the suit. The court rejected this argument, stating that the wakf's character persists once created, unaffected by subsequent actions of the Mutwalli or others. Authority of Deputy Commissioner: The Shia Central Board of Wakf requested the Deputy Commissioner to issue a notice to the appellant to hand over possession of the disputed plots. The appellant challenged this notice, claiming that the Deputy Commissioner had no authority under the 1960 Act to issue such a notice. The court upheld the authority of the Deputy Commissioner, emphasizing that the wakf properties remained under the purview of the Board of Wakfs, and the notice was valid under the relevant provisions of the Act. Transfer of Wakf Properties: The appellant contended that the transfer of the disputed plots to him was valid, as the properties were recorded as secular in revenue records and due to the decree obtained in the suit. However, the court held that the transfer was invalid since the wakf properties, once created, cannot be transferred by the Wakif or the Mutwalli. The court deemed the collusive decree between the Wakif and the Mutwalli as void, emphasizing that the wakf properties are not personal assets of the Mutwalli but are dedicated to the wakf. Conclusion: The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the High Court's judgment. It upheld the principles governing the creation and continuation of wakfs, emphasizing that once a wakf is established, the properties remain dedicated to the wakf and cannot be transferred or extinguished by subsequent actions. The court found no merit in the arguments presented by the appellant and ruled in favor of the Shia Central Board of Wakf, maintaining the sanctity of the wakf properties.
|
