SANTOKH SINGH Vs. PUNJAB WAKF BOARD AMBALA CANTT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 30th November, 1978 passed by the Addl. District Judge, Hoshiarpur by which the appeal of the defendant-appellant was dismissed and judgment and decree dated June 4, 1977 passed by Sub Judge, Dasuya was upheld, by which the trial Court decreed the suit of the plaintiff.

(2.) Brief facts as alleged in the plaint are that the plaintiff Board is the owner of the Wakf property situated in the State of Punjab, that the suit property is also Wakf property which vests in almighty God and the plaintiff is to manage the same; that the title of the plaintiff was also admitted by the defendant-appellant and in that behalf also moved an application to the Wakf Board to lease out the same and also made further admissions of certain litigations between the defendant and one Ajmer Singh; that the defendant also filed a suit against the plaintiff claiming himself to be lessee before the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Dasuya, that the defendant was claiming to be lessee over the suit property which he is not and in order to remove the encroachment it necessitated the plaintiff to file the suit for declaration to the effect that the plaintiff is the owner in possession of the suit property and in the alternative in case the plaintiff is not entitled to a decree for declaration suit for possession of the said property was filed through Shri Farukh Akhtar Property officer who is authorised to file the same on behalf of the plaintiff. The suit was contested by filing the written statement and the allegations made in the plaint were denied. It was pleaded that the suit property is owned by the proprietary body of the village but now the defendant is in possession of the same as lessee. It was also pleaded that the defendant is entitled to retain the possession as he is lessee or licensee over the suit property. The preliminary objections that the suit is not properly valued and the same is not maintainable and also that no authority has been given to Farukh Akhtar to file the suit and also that the suit is barred by limitation were also raised.

(3.) On pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed :-