ABDUL RAUF Vs. HAFIZ MOHAMMAD UMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TWO cases arising out of Section 10, Mussalman Wakf Act, 1923, have been referred to us. In the first, Civil Revision No. 90 of 1947, two questions arise: (1) Whether the District Court is competent to entertain an application under Section 10 and (2) whether Section 5 can be called in aid in respect of subsequent statements of account in cases where the initial statement contemplated by Section 3 has not been. filed. In the second case, civil Revision No. 103 of 1947, only the first point arises.

(2.) THIS opinion will govern both references. In both cases applications were made to the District Court requesting that action be taken against the respective non-applicants under Section 10 for failure to comply with the provisions of Section 3 and, in Civil Revision No. 90 of 1947, for failure to comply with Section 5 also.

(3.) EVERY other section of the Act, except those where such a reference would be out of place, speaks of "the Court" and expressly defines the functions and powers of "the Court" under the Act. Thus, Section 3 which imposes the obligation to furnish certain particulars relating to wakfs states that the statements shall be filed in "the Court". Section 4 which deals with the publication of these particulars requires "the Court" to cause notice of the furnishing thereof to be affixed in some conspicuous place in "the Court" house and further empowers "the Court" to make a certain enquiry and to call for further particulars and documents. Section Section fixes the time within which these and the subsequent statements set out in Section 5 are to be filed in "the Court" and empowers "the Court" to extend time. Section 6 requires an audit of the accounts furnished to "the Court". Section 9 empowers a person to inspect these statements and particulars and to obtain copies with the permission of "the Court". Section 11 also refers to "the Court" regarding court-fees and rules for the safe custody of statements, audit reports and deeds.