Punjab Wakf Board vs Harbans Singh and Others

L.N. Mittal, J.—Plaintiff Punjab Wakf Board has filed this revision petition impugning judgment and decree dated 20.3.2006 passed by learned Wakf Tribunal, Amritsar thereby dismissing suit filed by the plaintiff against the defendants/respondents Harbans Singh etc. for possession of the suit property by ejectment of the defendants. Case of the plaintiff is that it is owner of the suit property and defendants were tenants therein under the plaintiff and their tenancy has been terminated by serving notice.

The defendants denied the plaintiff to be owner of the suit property. The defendant also denied their tenancy over the suit property. Various other pleas were also raised.

Learned Wakf Tribunal has dismissed plaintiffs suit primarily on the ground that service of notice for termination of tenancy has not been proved.

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

Counsel for the respondents contended that Wakf Tribunal constituted under the Wakf Act, 1995 (in short, "the Act") had no jurisdiction to try the suit. Reliance in support of this contention has been placed on judgment of Hon''ble Supreme Court in Ramesh Gobindram (dead) through Lrs. Vs. Sugra Humayun Mirza Wakf, .

On the other hand, counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner contended that since defendants denied the ownership of the plaintiff over the suit property, Wakf Tribunal only has jurisdiction to try the suit. Reliance in support of this contention has been placed on four un-reported judgments of this Court namely District Collector-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Jalandhar and another v. Punjab Wakf Board and another, Civil Revision No. 889 of 2011, decided on 22.2.2011; Mahijit Singh and others v. The Punjab Wakf Board and others, Civil Revision No. 5875 of 2003, decided on 13.12.2010; Jasbir Singh and another v. Punjab Wakf Board, Civil Revision No. 4566 of 2009, decided on 2.12.2010 and State of Punjab and others v. Punjab Wakf Board, Civil Revision No. 6725 of 2010, decided on 10.1.2012. SLP against judgment in the case of District Collector (supra) was dismissed as withdrawn whereas Special Leave Petitions against remaining three judgments are said to be pending in Hon''ble Supreme Court.

Counsel for defendants/respondents stated that the defendants admit that the plaintiff is owner of the suit property.

Since defendants have now admitted that plaintiff Wakf Board is owner of the suit property, jurisdiction of the Wakf Tribunal to try suit for possession by way of ejectment of defendants, who were allegedly tenants in the suit property, is barred and only civil court has jurisdiction to try the suit, in view of ratio of law laid down by Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh Gobindram (supra). In view of aforesaid admission by counsel for the defendants that the plaintiff is owner of the suit property, unreported judgments of this Court in the cases of District Collector-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Jalandhar; Mahijit Singh; Jasbir Singh and State of Punjab and others (supra) are not attracted. Resultantly, the instant revision petition is disposed of by holding that Tribunal under the Act had no jurisdiction to try the suit. In view thereof, impugned judgment and decree passed by the Wakf Tribunal are set aside and plaint is ordered to be returned to the plaintiff-petitioner for presentation in civil court of competent jurisdiction. Plaintiff is directed to appear before the Wakf Tribunal on 22.7.2013 for taking back the plaint.