TYEBHOY ESSOFALLI THINGNA Vs. COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application in revision against the order of the District Judge of Ahmedabad passed in an inquiry held under Section 6C of the Mussalman Wakf Act, 1923, as amended by Bombay Act XVIII of 1935. The petitioner is the managing trustee of the Matekati Charitable Properties Trust situated at Ahmedabad and Surat. The trust was created by a deed executed on July 6, 1911. The deed provides that after payment of all taxes, dues and assessments payable in respect of the trust premises and other expenses for repairs, insurance, etc., the trustees appointed by the deed should apply not less than half the net income towards the establishment, continuance and maintenance at Surat of a charitable dispensary, a hospital and a maternity hospital to be named "The Maskati Charitable Dispensary and Hospitals", and divide the balance of the net income into eight equal shares between the settlor's sons and daughters during their respective lives and after their deaths among their legitimate lineal descendants, provided that in case of failure of descendants of the settlor the whole of the balance of that net income is to be applied for the purposes and benefit of the said "Maskati Charitable Dispensary and Hospitals."

(2.) On October 16, 1940, the learned District Judge of Ahmedabad called upon the petitioner to pay a contribution towards the wakf administration fund. The petitioner made an application contending that the wakf was such as is described in Section 3 of the Mussalman Wakf Validating Act, 1913, and, therefore, the Mussalman Wakf Act of 1923 was not applicable to it, and also that he had already paid the contribution to the wakf administration fund at Surat and could not, therefore, be called upon to pay it over again at Ahmedabad.

(3.) The learned District Judge held an inquiry under Section 6C of the Mussalman Wakf Act, 1923, and held that since at least half the income of the trust was independent of any family obligation, that part of the wakf was governed by the Act of 1923, and that in respect of that part of the wakf contribution was liable to be paid towards the administration fund. He further ordered that the applicant should apply to the Surat Court for a refund of the amount wrongly paid by him there.