Polara Parth Bhupatbhai vs Jumma Masjid Trust Board
2025 Latest Caselaw 7339 Guj

Gujarat High Court

Polara Parth Bhupatbhai vs Jumma Masjid Trust Board on 9 October, 2025

                                                                                                                  NEUTRAL CITATION




                            C/CRA/4/2023                                       JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2025

                                                                                                                   undefined




                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                                       R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 4 of 2023


                      FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


                      HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER                               Sd/-
                      ==========================================================

                                  Approved for Reporting                       Yes            No
                                                                                ✔
                      ==========================================================
                                             POLARA PARTH BHUPATBHAI & ANR.
                                                         Versus
                                            JUMMA MASJID TRUST BOARD & ORS.
                      ==========================================================
                      Appearance:
                      MR MAKBUL I MANSURI(2694) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
                      M S BHADKI(8665) for the Opponent(s) No. 1
                      MR AFTABHUSEN ANSARI(5320) for the Opponent(s) No. 3
                      UNSERVED WANT OF TIM for the Opponent(s) No. 2
                      ==========================================================

                         CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER

                                                           Date : 09/10/2025

                                                          ORAL JUDGMENT

1. The present Revision Application is filed challenging the order dated 16.11.2022 passed by the Tenth Additional Senior Civil Judge, Jamnagar, in Regular Civil Suit No. 758 of 2021, whereby the application filed under the provision of Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) has been rejected.

2. For the sake of brevity, parties are referred to as per their original status in the suit.

3. The brief facts giving rise to the present Revision Application

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/CRA/4/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2025

undefined

are that the Plaintiff filed, Civil Suit No. 758 of 2021, claiming to be the tenant of the Suit Property against Juma Masjid Trust Board and Others. The Plaintiff asserted that the relationship between the Plaintiff and Defendant No. 1 is that of owner and tenant, and that the Plaintiff is occupying the suit property, pursuant to a rent agreement, dated 26.04.2011. Consequently, the suit was filed seeking a permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from disturbing, obstructing, or causing hindrances to the Plaintiff's possession of the property stated in Schedule 'A' of the plaint, along with a declaration to that effect.

4. Defendant No. 3 filed an application under the provisions of Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the CPC, on the ground that since the suit was filed against the Juma Masjid Trust Board, the suit property is inherently a waqf property. Therefore, as per Section 83 of the Waqf Act, 1995, all such disputes must be decided by the Waqf Tribunal constituted under the said Act, and the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is barred. It was, therefore, contended that the plaint was required to be rejected as being barred by law. After considering the plaint and the documentary evidence produced therewith, the Trial Court rejected the said application. Hence, the present Revision Application was filed.

5. Learned Advocate for the Defendant/Applicant primarily argued that in view of Section 83 read with Section 85 of the Waqf

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/CRA/4/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2025

undefined

Act, 1995, the Civil Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the suit. This is because the suit property belongs to a Waqf. As per Section 83, any dispute, question, or matter relating to a waqf property or concerning the rights and obligations of the lessor and lessee must be decided by the Tribunal formed under the said Act. Consequently, the suit filed in the Civil Court is barred under Section 85 of the Waqf Act, and thus, the Trial Court erred in rejecting the application filed under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the CPC.

6. The Learned Advocate for the Defendant/Applicant relied on the judgment reported in (2022) 4 SCC 414 in the case of Rashid Wali Beg vs. Farid Pindari and Others, wherein it was held that a suit for permanent injunction in respect of a Waqf or Waqf Property, including the power to issue temporary injunctions, must be decided by the Waqf Tribunal and not the Civil Court. Accordingly, it was prayed that the present Revision Application be allowed and the plaint be rejected.

7. None appeared for the Plaintiff/Respondent.

8. Having heard the Learned Advocate for the Defendant/Applicant and having taken into consideration the plaint, the documents annexed with the plaint, and the order passed by the Trial Court, the fact remains that the Plaintiff has filed a suit claiming to be a tenant of the property against Defendant No. 1, a

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/CRA/4/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2025

undefined

Waqf property.

It is pertinent to consider Section 83 of the Waqf Act, 1995, which reads as follows:

"83. Constitution of Tribunals, etc.-- (1) The State Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute as many Tribunals as it may think fit, for the determination of any dispute, question or other matter relating to a waqf or waqf property, eviction of a tenant or determination of rights and obligations of the lessor and the lesse of such property, under this Act and define the local limits and jurisdiction of such Tribunals."

(2) Section 83(2) of the Waqf Act, 1995, specifies that any mutawalli, a person interested in a waqf, or any other person aggrieved by an order made under the Act or its rules can apply to the Waqf Tribunal for determination of the issue within the stipulated time. This sub-section grants the right to seek resolution from the Tribunal for any grievance related to waqf matters.

9. The present dispute concerns a matter relating to a waqf property and specifically seeks the determination of the rights of the Plaintiff, who claims to be a tenant against the landlord, where the property is admittedly a Waqf property. Therefore, as per Section 85 of the said Act, which reads as under:

"85. Bar of jurisdiction of civil courts. - No suit or other legal proceeding shall lie in any civil court, revenue court and any other authority in respect of any dispute, question or other matter relating to any waqf, waqf

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/CRA/4/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2025

undefined

property or other matter which is required by or under this Act to be determined by a Tribunal."

The Civil Court, therefore, will not have the jurisdiction to hear and decide the said dispute, as it is required to be determined by the Tribunal under Section 83 read with other provisions of the Waqf Act.

10. Moreover, the Apex Court in the case of Rashid Wali Beg vs. Farid Pindari and Others (supra) has held in Para 54.17 & 54.18, which reads as under :

54. In sum and substance, the Act makes a reference, to 3 types of remedies, namely, that of a suit, application or appeal before the Tribunal, in respect of the following matters:

54.1........

54.17- Any dispute, question or other matter relating to a waqf property [Section 83(1)]. 54.18- Any dispute, question or other matter relating to a waqf property [Section 83(1)]. 54.20.......

Moreover, at para 69 of the said judgment, the Apex Court has held " In the case on hand, the property is admitted to be a waqf property Therefore, to allow the plaintiff to ignore the Waqf Tribunal and to seek a decree of permanent injunction and mandatory injunction from a civil court, would be to ignore the mandate of Sections 83 and 85 which speak of any dispute, question or other matter relating to a waqf or a waqf property. There is also one more issue. In the written statement, Defendant 1 has admitted the existence of the waqf and also admitted that the father of the plaintiff by name Riyaz Ahmad is the mutawalli. But the claim of the plaintiff that he is the beneficiary of the waqf has been

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/CRA/4/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2025

undefined

denied. Therefore, a question as to the nature of the waqf and whether the plaintiff is a beneficiary of the waqf, has also arisen in this case. This question has necessarily to be decided by the Tribunal and not the civil court"

11. In light of the facts of the present case, where the suit property belongs to the Waqf Board and the Plaintiff is claiming a right with respect to the Waqf property, the matter must be decided by the Tribunal constituted under the Waqf Act. Consequently, the Civil Court lacks the jurisdiction to hear the suit.

12. In view of the aforesaid facts, Section 85 clearly bars the jurisdiction of the Civil Court. The plaint that has been filed by the plaintiff is barred by law and therefore, the plaint is required to be rejected. In view of the same, the present Revision Application is allowed, the rule is made absolute, the plaint filed in Civil Suit No. 758 of 2021 is hereby rejected.

Sd/-

(SANJEEV J.THAKER,J) URIL RANA/RAJAT