MOHD MUSTAFA SHAREEF Vs. MASOOM ALI MOHALLA COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first Defendant in O.S. No. 102 of 2005 before the Andhra Pradesh Wakf Tribunal (for short 'Tribunal'), Hyderabad, is the Petitioner. The judgment and decree dated 05.04.2007 in the aforesaid suit decreed by the tribunal is questioned on various grounds including competency of the first and second Respondents/Plaintiffs and on merits on the ground that the suit schedule property is not a wakf property as projected by the Respondents/Plaintiffs.

(2.) The learned Counsel for the Petitioner asserts that the gazette notification dated 01.02.1990 issued by the Government, marked as Ex. A2, does not relate to the suit schedule property. Learned Counsel for the Respondents on the other hand supports the impugned judgment by relying upon Ex. A2 aforesaid and the findings reached by the tribunal in its judgment.

(3.) Paragraph 3 of the impugned judgment shows that the Respondents/Plaintiffs initially filed O.S. No. 875 of 2000 before the Principal District Judge, Warangal and later it was made over to II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Warangal, where the issues were framed and the oral and documentary evidence on behalf of both sides was recorded. The said Court also took note of the fact that during the pendency of the suit, the law relating to jurisdiction of the court has undergone a change and the Plaintiff himself contended before the trial Court as recorded in para 6 of the judgment that if the Court comes to the conclusion that it has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit, the plaint may be returned. The Learned Counsel for the Respondent/Plaintiff also contended that in case the Court comes to the conclusion that it has no jurisdiction due to change in law, the plaint may be either rejected or dismissed.