PUNJAB WAKF BOARD Vs. MEHAR SINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present Civil Misc. Application has been filed by the Punjab Wakf Board (hereinafter referred to as "the Board") for recalling of the order dated 30.9.2010 passed by a coordinate Bench of this court whereby on account of the statement made by the counsel, it had been permitted to withdraw the suit itself with liberty to file a fresh suit for possession before the competent Civil Court in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Ramesh Gobindram (dead) through L. Rs. Vs. Sugra Humayun Mirza Wakf : (2010) 8 SCC 726.

(2.) THE averments made in the application now are that the respondents had denied the title of the land in question and therefore, the liberty which was granted was liable to be recalled and the matter was liable to be heard on merits. Reliance has also been placed upon the judgment of the Apex Court in a subsequent decision in Board of Wakf West Bengal and another Vs. Anis Fatma Begum and another : 2010 (14) SCC 588. It is accordingly submitted that since there was a dispute as such regarding the title of the property, the Tribunal was the competent authority and the case should be decided on merits. It is further submitted that the judgment in Ramesh Gobindram's case (supra) pertained to the issue of eviction of a tenant and in such circumstances, the Apex court had held that the Wakf Tribunal would have no jurisdiction and only the Civil Court would have jurisdiction. The judgments are accordingly sought to be distinguished.

(3.) A perusal of the judgment which was the subject matter of challenge passed by the Addl. District Judge, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhari dated 1.4.2009 would go on to show that the case of the Board was for possession of the suit property measuring 138 Kanals 11 Marlas and recovery of the mesne profits on the strength of ownership of the property in question. Reference had also been made to the earlier suit decided on 24.12.1991 and the subsequent appeal dated 6.4.1995 and the Regular Second Appeal No. 983 of 1995 decided by this court on 11.12.1995.