SYED ZAINUL ABEDEEN versus THE RAJASTHAN BOARD OF MUSLIM WAKF

Citation: [2019] 11 S.C.R. 1006 · Decided: 30-08-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: N.V. RAMANA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1006
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 11 S.C.R.
SYED ZAINUL ABEDEEN
v.
THE RAJASTHAN BOARD OF MUSLIM WAKF
(Civil Appeal No. 7130 of 2010)
AUGUST 30, 2019
[N. V. RAMANA AND AJAY RASTOGI, JJ.]
Waqf Act, 1954:
ss.4, 5(2) and 6 proviso - Suit u/s. 6 seeking declaration that
the subject property was not Waqf-Al-Allah, but Waqf-Alal-Aulad
- Suit was filed beyond statutory period of one year - Courts below
held that suit was barred by limitation and hence not maintainable
- Appeal to Supreme Court - Held: Suit was undisputedly preferred
beyond statutory period of limitation - Once the property is
registered as  Waqf-Al-Allah the dispute regarding nature of Waqf
is open to be examined only within the four corners of s.6 and
hence the limitation period as provided in proviso to s.6 would be
applicable - Limitation will not be guided by s.113 of Limitation
Act - Limitation Act, 1963 - s.113.
s.56 - Applicability of - To the proceedings under Chapter
II - Held: s.56 deals with the judicial proceedings under Chapter
VII - It has no application to the proceedings under Chapter II.
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 It is not disputed that after affording
opportunity of hearing to the respective parties including the
appellant/plaintiff, a finding has been recorded by the Survey
Commissioner of Wakfs in its report dated 2nd January, 1965
holding the subject property with attached lands, shops, buildings
and other premises as “Wakf-Al-Allah” and according to the
report, the subject property was included in the list of wakfs and
published in the Official Gazette in terms of sub-section (2) of
Section 5 of the Act, 1954 dated 2nd December, 1965 and the
suit for declaration was instituted before the Court of competent
jurisdiction under Section 6 of Act, 1954 on 17th January, 1967.
The suit was preferred beyond a statutory period of limitation
1006
   [2019] 11 S.C.R. 1006
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1007
of one year and this statement of fact has not been disputed by
the appellant also in his pleadings.A concurrent finding of fact
has been recorded by all the three Courts and there is no
manifest error in the finding of fact recorded by the Courts below
which needs interference. [Paras 14, 15 and 19] [1011-B-D;
1014-F]
1.2 The Parliament, in its wisdom, considered it
appropriate to attach finality to the list of wakfs published in the
Gazette added a proviso to Section 6 which has been couched
in the negative words that no suit shall be entertained after the
expiry of one year from the date of publication of the list of wakfs
under sub-section (2) of Section 5 of Act, 1954. [Para 17] [1014-
C-D]
1.3 Once the property, after the survey, has been
registered in the list of wakfs as Wakf-Al-Allah on the basis of
the finding recorded by the Survey Commissioner in its report,
the dispute regarding the nature of wakfs registered is open to
be examined only within the four corners of Section 6 of Act,
1954. The plea of the appellant that subject property being Wakf-
Alal-Aulad, Section 6 has been erroneously referred to and the
limitation has to be guided by Section 113 of the Limitation Act,
is without substance. [Para 20] [1014-H; 1015-A]
2.  Section 56 of the Act, 1954 is dealing with the judicial
proceedings under Chapter VII and if any person is aggrieved
by any action/inaction of the Board, other than the one which
has been specified under Chapter II, it has to serve a legal notice
and on expiry of two months, suit could be instituted against the
Board and it is not open for the appellant to invoke Section 56
of the Act, 1954 in support of his defence which, in the instant
case, has no application. [Para 21] [1015-C-D]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 7130
of 2010.
From the Judgment and Order dated 02.03.2009 of the High
Court  of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench in S.B. Civil Second
Appeal No. 51 of 1989.
S. Wasim A.Qadri, Sr. Adv., Zaid Ali Subzposh, Tamim Qadri,
Saeed Qadri, Lakshmi Raman Singh, Advs. for the Appellant.
SYED ZAINUL ABEDEEN v. RAJASTHAN
BOARD OF MUSLIM WAKF
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1008
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 11 S.C.R.
Raj Kishore Choudhary, M. Z. Chaudhary, Aftab Ali Khan,
Shakeel Ahmed, Nakul Chaudhary, Arvind Kumar Kanva, Ali Safeer
Farooqi, Syed Imtiyaz Ali, Advs. for the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
RASTOGI, J.
1. The instant appeal is directed against the concurrent finding
of all the three Courts below on the issue that the suit filed by the
appellant/plain

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