FAQRUDDIN (DEAD) THROUGH L.RS. versus TAJUDDIN (DEAD) THROUGH L.RS.

Citation: [2008] 9 S.C.R. 377 · Decided: 16-05-2008 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2008] 9 S.C.R. 377 
.. + 
FAQRUDDIN (DEAD) THROUGH L.RS. 
A 
v. 
TAJUDDIN (DEAD) THROUGH L.RS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 3643 of 2008) 
MAY 16, 2008 
B 
[S.B. SINHA AND LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA, JJ] 
Mohammedan Law: 
Jaipur Matmi Rules, 1945 - Rule 13 - Sajjadanashin or 
Mutawalli, office of - Inheritance to - Held: Rule of primogeni- c 
ture is not applicable to office$ of Sajjadanashin and Mutawalli 
- Sajjadanashin is a spiritual office and Mutawalli is a man-
ager of secular properties - Both offices are of different nature 
- Inheritance of office may not be governed by law of inherit-
ance - Office of Sajjadnashin involves requisite qualifications D 
- In such cases, jurisdiction of Revenue Authorities is limited 
- It cannot decide a question of title - Title depends upon 
religious law or statutory law or customary law - Entry in rev-
enue records is not a document of title - On facts, with regard 
to appointment of plaintiff (since deceased) and his prede-
E 
cessor and successor-in-interest as Sajjadanashin or 
Mutawal/i, when he was recognized as 'Matmidar' after the 
death of earlier 'Sajjadanashin' and 'Matmidar' K, the Board 
could not have conferred title upon plaintiff - Its decision be-
... 
ing without jurisdiction would be nullity- Jurisdictional fact would 
). 
not attract principles of estoppel - Also entry of the revenue 
F 
records did not give rise to fresh cause of action so as to take 
away the effect of principles of res judicata - Wakf was held to 
be Wakf Al Au/ad - More so, on death of plaintiff, who died 
issueless, suit abated - Recognition of right in his favour was 
persona/ in nature - No decree for possession could be granted G 
in favour of plaintiff's legal representative, until their right vis-
""' 
i 
a-vis bequeathment by plaintiff was not determined - There 
was valid declaration in favour of appellant as Mutawalli of 
Dargah since 1938 and 'Sajjadanashin' since 1958 - Thus, 
377 
H 
378 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2008] 9 S.C.R. 
+ 
~ 
A plaintiff having not derived any title as 'matmidar' cannot be-
come a 'Sajjadanas/Jin' or Mutawalli. 
HZS was a great Sufi Saint. In view of his spiritual 
attainments, the Ruler of State of Jaipur gave him 7 bighas 
B 
of land. However, he acquired 8 bighas 2 biswas lands 
out of his own funds. On his demise, his tomb was treated 
as a sacred place and it attained the status of a Dargah. 
GRS, HZS's sisters son was the first Sajjadanashin and 
Mutawalli of Dargah. In 1860, SIS succeeded to the said 
office followed by SMS. SMS was convicted by a criminal 
c court. Matmi was sanctioned in favour of K, younger 
brother of SMS. K died in 29.05.1938. He allegedly ex-
ecuted a Will and nominated his eldest son-A, as 
Sajjadanashin and another son, F as Mutawalli. In 1939, 
M, son of SMS filed a suit against K claiming inheritance 
D and also against 'A' claiming election to the post of 
Sajjadanashin which were dismissed. Appeals were also 
dismissed. During pendency of the proceedings, A died 
and in his place, his son T was substituted. The Wakf was 
held to be Wakf Al Aulad. In 1953, T filed another suit, for a 
E declaration that he was the rightful Sajjadanashin of 
Dargah and F, the deceased predeceased-in-interest of 
the appellants be removed from the office of Mutawalli. It 
was held that the plaintiff was not entitled to be 
'Sajjadanashin' as it was a private land. Appeal was also 
,... 
F dismissed and the said proceeding attained finality. It is 
" 
alleged that on the demise of A, the second brother-SS 
became Sajjadanashin. On demise of SS, the younger 
brother, F became Sajjadanashin according to custom. 
He continued to hold the office of Mutawalli also. In 1966, 
G T, A's son filed another suit claiming himself to be the 
Sajjadanashin and later on withdrew the suit. In 1974, 
'matmi' proceeding was initiated and plaintiff's name-T 
.. 
~ 
was directed to be mutated by the Board of Revenue. 
Plaintiff filed a fresh suit that having been declared as a 
H 
holder of land, he became Mutawalli and Sajjadanashin, 
FAQRUDDIN (DEAD) THROUGH L.RS. v. TAJUDDIN 379 
-~ 
~ 
(DEAD) THROUGH L.RS. 
thus, entitled to possess the same exclusively. The trial A 
court held that the suit was barred under the principles of 
res judicata. During pendency of appeal, T filed another 
suit. First Appeal was also filed. F died in 1981 and appel-
lants were substituted in his place. According to appel-
lants, SZA was declared as Mutawalli. In 1987, T died is-
B 
s

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.