VALLAL SEETHAKADHI NAGAR Vs. SYED AHMED AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed to set aside the order dated 27.09.2013 passed by the Wakf Tribunal (1st Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai) in O.A.No.9 of 2013.

(2.) The petitioner is the respondent in O.A N.9 of 2013 on the file of Wakf tribunal (I Asst. Judge, City Civil Court), Chennai. The respondents filed the said OA against the petitioner for permanent injunction restraining the petitioner from interfering with his right for performance of annual sandal and urs and turn management entitling them to collect and receive the gifts, offerings and hyundial collection during the period mentioned therein. According to the respondents, as per the judgment of this Court in C.S. No.116 of 1909 confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in OSA No.34 of 1910, they are entitled to perform the religious rights and is entitled to the hyundial collection during that period by turn management. The period of muthawali appointed by the petitioner by order dated 01.01.1991 expired in the year 1996. Subsequently no muthawalli was appointed. The respondents sought permission of the petitioner to discharge their duties of mujavar during their turn period for which the petitioner, by letter dated 12.09.2012 directed the respondents to send a request through Syed Moinuddin. Therefore, the respondents filed W.P.No.17054 of 2012 before this Court. 2(a) The petitioner informed before this Court that hyundial collection will be deposited with the Wakf board and subsequent to the decision by competent court, it will be handed over to the respondents. Recording the same, the writ petition was disposed of and not being satisfied with the said order, the respondent filed W.A. No.1793 of 2012. By order dated 23.08.2012, the Division Bench of this court dismissed the Writ Appeal confirming the order of this court made in W.P.No.17054 of 2012. In view of the dismissal of Writ Appeal, the respondents filed OA No.9 of 2013 before the wakf tribunal. The respondents also filed application for interim order. According to the petitioner, they filed counter in the application and reserved their right to file counter in the main OA stating that O.A is not maintainable. According to the petitioner, under Section 83, an application can be filed only if a party is aggrieved by any of the order passed by the petitioner. In the present case, the respondents are not challenging any of the order of the petitioner. In view of the same only, the suit is maintainable for the relief of permanent injunction and the OA filed by the respondent is not maintainable before the Wakf Tribunal.

(3.) The Wakf Tribunal, considering the rival contentions, documents and judgments relied on by the parties, allowed the OA holding that the Tribunal has got power of the Civil Court and hence OA No.9 of 2013 is maintainable.