HARYANA WAKF BOARD Vs. KRISHAN LAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant revision has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 30.01.2013 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ambala whereby application moved by the petitioner-defendant no. 1 under Order 7 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short "the CPC") for return of plaint on the ground of bar of jurisdiction of civil court, has been dismissed. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts relevant for disposal of the present petition are that respondent no. 1-plaintiff Krishan Lal filed suit for declaration for changing of entries in the revenue records. Upon notice, the petitioner through counsel put in appearance and moved the application under Order 7 Rule 10 of the CPC for return of plaint on the ground of lack of jurisdiction of the Civil Court. In the application, the stand has been taken that the jurisdiction of the civil court is barred under Section 85 of the Wakf Act, 1995 (in short "the Act"). The said application of the petitioner has been dismissed by the learned trial Court vide impugned order dated 30.1.2013. Hence, the present revision.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the trial Court has fallen in error while passing the impugned order. In support of his contentions, the learned counsel has relied upon judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Ramesh Gobindram (dead) through LRs. v. Sugra Humayun Mirza Wakf, 2010 AIR(SC) 2897 and Board of Wakf West Bengal v. Anis Fatma Begum and another, 2011 2 MadLJ 219.