SAIDUNESSA Vs. BADRUNESSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Late Md. Ziaul Haque, a distinguished citizen of this city created a wakf in respect of his properties orally on 22-5-53 and thereafter by a deed of declaration dt. 8-5-83. Under the terms of this wakf he appointed the opposite party Mrs. Badrunessa as Mutwalli in respect of demarcated th share of a house situated at No. 18, Ganesh Chandra Avenue. The opposite party ran away with Md. Golam Zeelani, the husband of her second elder sister Jahaeetunessa on or about 19-11-68 and was not in Calcutta till December, 1977. Before that on 8-11-68 the Wakeef executed a deed of rectification whereby he appointed his youngest daughter Maherunnessa the Mutwalli of the said property in place of the opposite party under the guardianship of her mother, the present petitioner Saidunnessa. The Wakeef died on 29-5-73.

(2.) At the petition of Saidunnessa the then Commissioner of Wakf Mr. I. Choudhury rectified the records of the Wakf Estate by replacing the name of the opp. parties with the name of Meherunnissa in respect of the aforementioned property. After her return to Calcutta, the opp. party petitioned the Commissioner of Wakf for review of the rectification and the then Commissioner set aside the previous order of rectification. The present petitioner has challenged this order of review by initiating C.R.No.9512(W) of 1980 which is still pending.

(3.) Thereafter the present opposite party instituted complaint case No.C/154 of 1983 in the court of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta, under Ss.406, 467, 471, 120B of the Penal Code against the present petitioner, another sister of hers of the name of Zebunnissa and an employee of the petitioner of the name of Kanai Lal Hazra The allegation against them are that on forged receipts manufactured by the petitioner purporting to have been signed by the opposite party rent from the tenants of the portion of the house mentioned above was collected by the said Kanai Hazra and further that with the aid and assistance of the sard Zebunnissa the present petitioner got a bank account opened in the name of the opposite party and encashed cheques there issued by the tenants and misappropriated the money. The learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has issued summons and the present petitioner and the aforementioned Kanai Lal have appeared before him.