ATAURREHMAN HABIBURREHMAN Vs. M. P. WAKF BOARD, BHOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Parties are heard finally at motion hearing stage. Applicant has filed present civil revision under Sec. 83(9) of the Wakf Act, 1995 being aggrieved by the impugned order dtd. 03/02/2022, whereby the suit of the applicant / plaintiff has been dismissed being time barred.

(2.) Counsel for the applicant contended that the Tribunal has erred in allowing the application under Sec. 32 of the Wakf Act and also erred in dismissing the suit without recording the evidence primarily on the ground of limitation. Sec. 6(1) of the Wakf Act is not applicable to the applicant because he is stranger to Wakf and is a non-muslim. No notice has been issued to any person interested in the suit property before issuing the gazette notification. The impugned order is bad in law and is also against the facts and circumstances of the case. Hence, he prays that the impugned order be set aside and the matter be remanded back to the Tribunal for its reconsideration.

(3.) Per contra, counsel for the other side have opposed the revision and prays for its rejection. Counsel for the respondent No.1 contended that as per the Sub Sec. (1) of Sec. 6 of the Wakf Act limitation is one year, which starts from the date of publication of Wakf notification dtd. 13/09/1985, therefore, this suit is time barred and this civil revision is not maintainable.