AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Honourable Mr. Justice A. Selvam
The Judgment and decree passed in Original Suit No.283 of 1998 by the Wakf Tribunal/Principal Sub Court, Tirunelveli are being challenged in the present Civil Revision Petition.
The respondent as plaintiff has filed Original Suit No.451 of 1995 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Tenkasi for the reliefs of declaration and recovery of possession and subsequently as per notification issued by the Government of Tamilnadu bearing No.536 dated 24.10.1997, Original Suit No.451 of 1995 has been withdrawn and transferred from the file of the District Munsif Court, Tankasi to the file of the Wakf Tribunal/Principal Sub Court, Tirunelveli and the same has been taken on file in Original Suit No.283 of 1998.
In the plaint it has been stated that the plaintiff is nothing but a Wakf and the suit property is nothing but a thatched shed and its appurtenant and the same has been let out to the defendant on monthly rental basis. Now the defendant has denied the title of the plaintiff to the suit property. Under the said circumstances the present suit has been instituted for the reliefs of declaration and recovery of possession.
In the written statement filed on the side of the defendant it is averred that the plaintiff is not the owner of the suit property. The suit property is a Government poramboke land and the defendant has put up a thatched shed and therefore, the plaintiff has no locus standi to maintain the present suit and altogether the present suit deserves to be dismissed.
On the basis of the rival pleadings raised on either side, the Court below has framed necessary issues and after analysing both the oral and documentary evidence has decreed the suit as prayed for. Against the Judgment and decree passed by the trial Court, the present Civil Revision Petition has been preferred at the instance of the defendant as revision petitioner.
The learned counsel appearing for the respondent is not present. Under the said circumstances, the present Civil Revision Petition is disposed of on merits on the basis of the contention put forth on the side of the revision petitioner/defendant.
The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner has contended that the present suit has been instituted for the reliefs of declaration and recovery of possession and the Wakf Tribunal/Principal Sub Court, Tirunelveli is not having jurisdiction to entertain the present suit in view of the nature of the reliefs sought for therein and the nature of the reliefs sought for in the plaint can be given only by the concerned District Munsif Court and therefore, the Judgment and decree passed by the Court below are totally erroneous and the same are liable to be set aside.
In support of the contention raised on the side of the revision petitioner, the decision reported in (2010) 6 MLJ 527 (Supreme Court) (Ramesh Gobindram (dead) through Lrs. v. Sugra Humayun Mirza Wakf) is relied upon, wherein the Honourable Apex Court has held that "jurisdiction of the Civil Court shall stand included in relation to only such matters as are required by or under the Wakf Act to be determined by the Tribunal and as such, a suit seeking eviction of the tenants from what is admittedly Wakf property could be filed only before the Civil Court and not before the Tribunal."
In the instant case, on the side of the plaintiff it has been specifically stated that the suit property is nothing but thatched shed and its appurtenance. The consistent stand taken on the side of the defendant is that the suit property is a Government poramboke land, wherein he put up a thatched shed in question. Therefore, it is quite clear that there is a dispute with regard to title of the suit property. As stated supra, the consistent case of the plaintiff is that the suit property is a wakf property and the same has been denied on the side of the defendant. Therefore, as per section 6 of the Wakf Act 1995 only the Wakf Tribunal is having power to decide the matter as to whether the suit property is a wakf property or not. The present suit has been instituted for the reliefs of declaration and recovery of possession and the same has not been instituted simply for getting the relief of recovery of possession. Since the defendant has not at all admitted the alleged tenancy that exists between him and the plaintiff and since there is a clear denial of title on the part of the defendant, only the Wakf Tribunal is the competent forum to decide the issue which involved in the present case. Therefore, it is very clear that the dictum given by the Honourable Apex Court is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case.
The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner has not at all touched the merit of the Judgment and decree passed by the Wakf Tribunal/Principal Sub Court, Tirunelveli. The present suit has been instituted for the reliefs of declaration and recovery of possession and in order to encrust the contention put forth on the side of the plaintiff, voluminous clinching documents have been filed. The Court below after considering all the contentions raised on either side has rightly decreed the suit. In view of the discussion made earlier, this Court has not found any error in the Judgment and decree passed by the Court below and altogether the present Civil Revision Petition deserves to be dismissed.
In fine, this Civil Revision Petition deserves dismissal and accordingly is dismissed without cost and the Judgment and decree passed in Original Suit No.283 of 1998 by the Wakf Tribunal/Principal Sub Court, Tirunelveli are confirmed. However, the revision petitioners are given six months time to vacate the suit property. Connected Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed.