Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

VAKF KABRISTAN BHURESHAH versus IX A.D.J. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Vakf Kabristan Bhureshah v. Ix A.D.J. & Others - WRIT - C No. 14744 of 1990 [2007] RD-AH 9847 (22 May 2007)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble Tarun Agarwala, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

The petitioner is a waqf and alleges ownership of plot Nos.696 and 697. The petitioner made a complaint to the Waqf Board alleging wrongful occupation of the waqf property by respondent Nos.3 to 6 on plot Nos.697 and 696. The Board directed the Inspector to submit a report and, based on the said report a notice was issued to the said respondents and, after considering the report, the Board found in its order dated 16.7.1987, that the respondents are in illegal occupation of a portion of plot Nos.696 and 697 and therefore, directed their eviction and for possession in favour of the waqf. The respondents, being aggrieved by the said, order preferred an appeal which was allowed by an order date 26.5.1990. The appellate authority held that the entire basis of the eviction was based on the report of the Lekhpal which report was in respect of another matter, namely, construction of the shop by the waqf and had nothing to do with the forceful or illegal occupation of the respondents. Consequently, the appeal of the respondent was allowed and the eviction order against them was set aside. Aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

The appellate authority while allowing the appeal  on the short ground that the Lekhpal's report  was in relation to another matter and therefore,  the said report could not be utilized  to find out as to whether the respondents had illegally occupied any portion of the property of the waqf. The appellate authority while discarding the report of the Lekhpal did not consider the report of the Inspector nor made any provision for actual survey of the area in order to establish as to whether any illegal possession  had been taken by the respondents or not. Consequently, in my view the impugned appellate order cannot be sustained and is quashed. The writ petition is allowed. The matter is remitted back to the appellant authority to readmit the appeal and decide the matter afresh after making a survey in order to find out as to whether the respondents had encroached any property of the waqf or not.

Dated:22.5.2007

AKJ (WP 14744/90)


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.