H.P. WAKF BOARD Vs. SH. GULAM AHMAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the defendants' Regular Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffs' Civil Suit No. 51/1 of 2001, titled as Gulam Ahmed and another v. Punjab Wakf Board and another, stands decreed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No. 1, Shimla, H.P., in terms of judgment and decree dated 23.8.2004. Such findings of fact, judgment and decree stand affirmed by the District Judge Shimla, in terms of judgment and decree dated 26.12.2005, passed in Civil Appeal No. 110-S/13 of 2004, titled as H.P Wakf Board and another v. Gulam Ahmad and another, filed by the defendants. Thus, the present appeal arises out of concurrent findings of fact.

(2.) Concurrently the Courts below have decreed the plaintiffs' suit for injunction whereby defendants stand restrained from dispossessing the plaintiffs except in accordance with law. It is not in dispute that plaintiffs Gulam Ahmad and Abdul Gani are in possession of the suit land admeasuring 27.7 sq. yards. Attempt made on behalf of the defendant Punjab Wakf Board - appellant herein of evicting the plaintiffs without following due process of law has been rightly held to be illegal. However, it is the grievance of the appellants that the observations made by the trial Court to the extent that the plaintiffs can be evicted only under the provisions of the H.P. Urban Rent Control Act, 1987, are illegal.

(3.) In view of the decision rendered by the apex Court in Ramesh Gobindram (deceased by LRs.) v. Sugra Humayun Mirza Wakf, AIR 2010 SC 2897, observations made by the trial Court to the extent that the premises would be governed under the provisions of the H.P. Urban Rent Control Act are unsustainable in law. To this extent, appeal stands allowed, leaving it for the appellants herein to initiate appropriate action for ejectment of the present respondents, in accordance with law. Impugned judgment and decree stands modified to the aforesaid extent.