AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Affidavit of service be kept on the record.
Challenge in this revisional application is the order passed by learned Civil Judge(Jr. Divn.), 2nd Court, Kandi in Misc Case No. 68 of 1990 No. 77 date 23.07.2007 wherein and whereby learned Judge has allowed the application under order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure and permitted the petitioner Janab Aiatullah Sk to be a party in the said misc case.
No one appears on behalf of the opposite parties despite service of notice.
Learned Advocate Mr. Partha Pratim Roy submits that an application under Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforems Act was filed before the learned Civil Judge(Jr. Divn.) for preemption of a particular plot of land. Therefore, the matter of such preemption is within limited jurisdiction of trial Court to decide between the parties. Curiously enough one Janab Aiatullah Sk filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for being impleaded in the said proceeding on the ground that the property covered by that misc case along with some other properties was vested to the Wakf Board on the strength of registered deed no. 358 dated 8th February, 1937. The applicants specifically pleaded in the said application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code that the petitioner along with his brothers become mutuwali of such Wakf property on the strength of the order passed by commissioner of Wakf Board on 16th August, 1989 vide order no. 6179 dated 16.08.1989 reference E.C. No. 5478. The further case of the applicants is that the petitioner in collusion with the opposite party had created some forged and fabricated documents in order to grab the suit property and that is why the presence of the applicant in that misc case is necessary for proper adjudication of the claim between the parties.
The specific case of the applicants, as unfolded in the petition under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code is that the present petitioner along with the opposite party is trying to grab the Wakf properties and that is why the misc case has been filed in connivance with the opposite party to grab the property of the Wakf. It is apparent from the order passed by learned trial Judge that learned trial Judge has gone through the order and thereafter satisfied that the suit property has been registered under the registration of Wakf under chapter 5 and under relevant provisions of Wakf Act, 1995. On the basis of such documents learned trial Judge has allowed the application under order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure so that the matter may be decided in presence of the applicants.
Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that the trial Judge has had no jurisdiction to decide the matters covered by Wakf Act and the misc case relating to Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act shall not be confused by adding the applicant as party to such misc case. It is further submitted that the learned trial Judge has failed to exercise his jurisdiction vested in him by allowing the application under Order 1 Rule 10 of Code of Civil Procedure and accordingly such order ought to be set aside.
Admittedly, private parties are claiming their right in respect of the property under Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act. It is needless to say that learned trial Judge cannot usurp the jurisdiction of the tribunal in terms of the Wakf Act.
It is equally true that if the properties covered under Wakf Act are being projected as private properties, in that event, the presence of the applicant is definitely needed in order to unfold that the private parties have filed a collusive application under Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act in order to grab the properties covered by the concerned Wakf Board. Learned trial Judge is definitely not going to usurp the jurisdiction of Wakf Board in terms of the Wakf Act but learned trial Judge would definitely pass necessary order to the effect that the property under reference would come within the purview of Wakf Board and the Court has got no jurisdiction to entertain the application under Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act. In that view of this case I do not find any illegality in the order passed by the learned trial Judge. Moreover it is urgently required that the matter should be disposed of in presence of the applicant who has been ordered to be added as party under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code.
The instant application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being devoid of merit is accordingly dismissed.
Having regard to the age of the misc case, learned trial Judge viz. learned Civil Judge(Jr. Divn.) 2nd Court, Kandi is requested to dispose of the misc case 68 of 1990 within six months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
The stay order, if there be any, is thus vacated.
Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the Court of Civil Judge(Jr. Divn.) 2nd Court, Kandi forthwith with reference to misc case no. 68 of 1990.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties as expeditiously as possible.