NURUDDIN BADAMIYA SAIYED Vs. IMAMSHAH BAWA ROZA COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present civil application is filed by the applicants seeking leave to appeal to the applicants to prefer an appeal under sec. 72(3) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to 'as the Act') challenging the impugned judgment and order in Revision Application No. 10 of 2003 passed by the Charity Commissioner, Gujarat State, Ahmedabad, dated 9.11.2004 and also the judgment and order in Civil Misc. Application No. 83 of 2004 passed by the Fast Track Court, Ahmedabad (Rural), allowing the application, exh. 11 under O.7 R. 11 as well as Civil Misc. Application No. 83 of 2004 on the grounds stated in the application.

(2.) Heard learned advocate Shri MTM Hakim for learned advocate S.S. Saiyed for the applicants, learned Sr. Counsel Shri KG Vakharia appearing with learned advocate Shri SK Patel for respondent No. 2, learned AGP Shri PP Banaji for respondent No. 3 and learned advocate Shri MI Merchant for respondent No. 4.

(3.) Learned advocate Shri Hakim referred to the background of facts and the impugned order at Annexure-A with the First Appeal, that is, the order in Revision Application No. 10/2003 passed by the Charity Commissioner, Gujarat State, Ahmedabad. The applicants filed an application under sec. 70-A before the Charity Commissioner that respondent No.1 Trust which has been registered as category "E" in the register of the trust may be registered as category "B". Learned advocate Shri Hakim submitted that as contended in the application the applicants are the trustees and beneficiaries who were not party to the proceedings either before the Charity Commissioner or the District Judge. He submitted that both the proceedings before the Charity Commissioner, Ahmedabad as well as before the District Judge are seriously prejudicial to the rights of the applicants and other beneficiaries of the trust. He submitted that the people are having religious faith in Dargah of Hazrat Pir Saiyed Imamshah Bawa Roja and therefore the present application has been filed seeking leave to appeal challenging the impugned order. He emphasised that as the applicants were not a party to the proceedings the present first appeal is sought to be filed as opponent No. 4 original applicant has not challenged the impugned order. Learned advocate Shri Hakim submitted that respondent No.1 is a religious trust and therefore it should be registered in "B" category. He tried to submit that as per the order passed in Civil Suit No. 168 of 1931 it is a religious institution and it has been registered as category "E" trust and therefore the application is made seeking leave to appeal the aforesaid appeal. It is also contended that the respondent trust was registered as a wakf in the year 1952 as at that time the trust was registered as a wakf under the provisions of the Act. However, when Wakf Act 1955 was brought into force the proceedings were required to be conducted under the Wakf Act.