PEER GULAM JILANI versus PEER GULAM NASEER AND ORS.

Citation: [2019] 9 S.C.R. 1122 · Decided: 24-07-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ASHOK BHUSHAN · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1122
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 9 S.C.R.
PEER GULAM JILANI
v.
PEER GULAM NASEER AND ORS.
(Civil Appeal Nos.10770– 10772 of 2013)
JULY 24, 2019
[ASHOK BHUSHAN AND NAVIN SINHA, JJ.]
Muslim Law: Rules of Zabta (Constitution) – Interpretation
of – Nomination of Sajjadah Nashin and Mutawalli – Fourth
Sajjadah Nashin and Mutawalli nominated his grandson (daughter’s
son)-respondent no. 1 as Sajjadah Nashin and Mutawalli –
Challenge to – Held: Rule 1 of the Zabta cannot be read as laying
down any hereditary succession to the office of Sajjadah Nashin
and Mutawalli nor can be read to lay down succession to lineal
descendants – Succession to the Sajjadah Nashin and Mutawalli is
selection by Sajjadah Nashin and Mutawalli – Zabta of Dargah
refers to spiritual Sect “Silsila” and the word family (Khandan) has
not been used in the limited sense – Respondent who was daughter’s
son of fourth Sajjadah Nashin and Mutawalli and who also traced
his lineage from the real brother of founder of Dargah, cannot be
said to be person not belonging to ‘Khandan’ – Furthermore,
Sajjadah Nashin who has been given right to select his successor,
his selection and nomination has to be given weight – Even a
person of minor age can be selected as Sajjadah Nashin and
Mutawalli – Word ‘Sagir Sinn’ in Rule 2 does not mean ‘minor son
but means “minor age” – Thus, the courts below correct in reading
the Zabta and holding that respondent was eligible to be nominated
as Sajjadah Nashin and Mutawalli.
Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The succession to the Sajjadah Nashin and
Mutawalli is not hereditary succession but it is selection by
Sajjadah Nashin and Mutawalli. The Zabta of Dargah refers to
spiritual Sect “Silsila” and the word family (Khandan) had not
been used in the limited sense. Rule 1 of the Zabta cannot be
read as laying down any hereditary succession to the office of
Sajjadah Nashin and Mutawalli nor Rule 1 can be read to lay down
[2019]  9 S.C.R. 1122
         1122
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1123
succession to lineal descendants. The respondent who was
daughter’s son of 4th Sajjadah Nashin and Mutawalli and who has
also traced his lineage from Shahabuddin real brother of founder
of Dargah, cannot be said to be person not belonging to
‘Khandan’. All the three Courts below have rightly held him to
be fully eligible. Furthermore, Sajjadah Nashin who has been given
right to select his successor, his selection and nomination has
also to be given weight. There is no dispute between the parties
that even a person of minor age can be selected as Sajjadah Nashin
and Mutawalli. [Para 11-13] [1130-C-H; 1131-A-B]
1.2 It cannot be accepted that use of word ‘Sagir Sinn’ in
Rule 2 means ‘minor son. Firstly, in the courts below appellant
never raised an issue or contention that word ‘Sagir Sinn’ used
in Rule 2 means ‘minor son’. When no such issue or submission
was raised, appellant cannot be allowed to raise this submission
in this Court for the first time. Secondly, the Hindi translation is
looked into which is actual translation of Urdu words in the Zabta.
In the counter-affidavit, the respondent has brought on the record
Hindi translation which is in Devnagri translation of actual Urdu
words. The word used is “Sagir Sinn”. The word “Sagir Sinn” is
a combination of two words ‘Sagir Sinn’. Word ‘Sinn’ is a Persian
word. In English Persian Dictionary word age has been mentioned
as ‘Sinn’. In another Persian-English Dictionary one of the
meanings to the Persian word ‘sinn’ is year, age, period of life.
Various combination of other different words using word ‘sinn’
has also been defined like ‘sinni balugh, sinni tamiz, sinni
shaikhukhiyat. The word ‘Sagir Sinn’ also gives the meaning of
“minor age”. In no manner the word “Sagir Sinn” can be read as
minor son. [Para 14– 17] [1131-C-H; 1132-A-B]
1.3 All the three courts have not committed any error in
reading the Zabta and coming to the conclusion that respondent
was eligible to be nominated as Sajjadah Nashin and Mutawalli.
[Para 18] [1132-B]
English Persian Dictionary by A. N. Woollaston;
Persian-English 
Dictionary 
by 
S. 
Steingass
-  referred to.
PEER GULAM JILANI  v. PEER GULAM NASEER AND ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1124
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 9 S.C.R.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 10770-
10772 of 2013
From the Judgment and Order dated  05.07.2012 of the High
Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur in S.B.C.S.A. Nos. 504, 506
and 507 of 2004
V. K. Shukla, Pramod Swarup, 

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