Sami Khan S/O Vazeer Khan vs Gore Miyan S/O Ismail Sab And Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 3132 Kant

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                 KALABURAGI BENCH

       DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021

                          BEFORE

THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

       REGULAR SECOND APPEAL No.200193/2016

BETWEEN:

SAMI KHAN S/O VAZEER KHAN
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
OCC: MUTAWALLI OF KALI MASJID
R/O TOWN CHITAGUPPA
TQ. HUMNABAD, DIST. BIDAR
                                             ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI SHIVAKUMAR KALLOOR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     GORE MIYAN S/O ISMAIL SAB
       AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS, OCC: PAN SHOP
       CLAIMING AS PRESIDENT OF MANAGING
       COMMITTEE, CHITAGUPPA-585201

2.     MOHD. MOIZUDDIN
       S/O MOHD. MOINUDDIN
       AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC: CARPENTER
       CLAIMING AS SECRETARY OF MANAGING
       COMMITTEE OF KALI MASJID
       CHITAGUPPA, R/O CHITAGUPPA-585201

3.     CHOTU MIYAN S/O MOHIUDDIN SAB
       AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS
       OCC: PENSIONER, R/O CHITAGUPPA
       TQ. HUMANABAD-585201

4.     MOHD. ISMAIL SAB
       S/O PATHRU SAB
       AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS
                                          RSA No.200193/2016
                             2


      OCC: PENSIONER
      R/O CHITAGUPPA
      TQ. HUMANABAD-585201

5.    MOHD. NAZEER
      S/O MOHD. HUSSAIN KIRKIRI
      AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
      OCC: MECHANIC
      R/O NEAR BUS STAND
      CHITAGUPPA
      TQ. HUMNABAD-585201

6.    MOHD. ISMAIL SAB KOTWAL
      AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
      OCC: PETTY BUSINESS
      R/O NEAR BUS STAND CHITAGUPPA
      TQ. HUMNABAD-585201

7.    ABDUL AZIZ MURGAWALE
      AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS
      OCC: BUSINESS
      R/O NEAR BUS STAND CHITAGUPPA
      TQ. HUMNABAD-585201

8.    MOHAMMAD SAB S/O ISMAIL SAB
      AGED MAJOR, OCC: ELECTRONIC SHOP
      R/O NEAR BUS STAND CHITAGUPPA
      TQ. HUMNABAD-585201

9.    JABBAR KHAN
      S/O MAHTAB KHAN KALIMASJIDWALE
      AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
      OCC: AGRICULTURE
      R/O CHITAGUPPA
      TQ. HUMNABAD-585201

10.   THE KARNATAKA WAKF BOARD
      CUNNINGHAM ROAD
      THROUGH ITS SECRETARY
      BANGALORE-560 001
                                            ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI GANESH KALBURGI, ADVOCATE FOR
 SRI AMEET KUMAR DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE
 FOR R1, R2, R5 & R7;
 SRI AJAYKUMAR A.K., ADVOCATE FOR R9;
 SRI MOHD. KHADER KHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R10)
                                            RSA No.200193/2016
                                3




      THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
100 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO ALLOW THE
APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 26.04.2016 PASSED BY SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT
HUMNABAD IN R.A.NO.4/2016 CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND
DECREE DATED 05.09.2012 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE
AT HUMNABAD, IN O.S.NO.111/1994.


      THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THROUGH PHYSICAL/VIDEO CONFERENCING HEARING, THIS DAY
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                           ORDER

The learned counsel from both sides are physically

present in the Court.

2. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that he

would not press on the memo dated 02.08.2021 seeking

deletion of respondent Nos.1, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 9. Hence, the said

memo is taken as not pressed.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant files a memo

seeking permission to withdraw this appeal with liberty to

approach the Karnataka Wakf Tribunal.

4. In his oral submission, the learned counsel for the

appellant submits that in view of Section 85 of the Wakf Act, RSA No.200193/2016

1995, it is the Wakf Tribunal which has power to decide the

question of Mutawalliship, which is the core question involved in

this appeal. As such, the appellant has decided to approach the

competent authority which is the Karnataka Wakf Tribunal.

5. The learned counsel for the respondents submits their

no objection for disposal of this appeal as not pressed and

reserving liberty to the appellant as prayed for.

In view of the memo and supporting submission from

both sides, the appeal stands disposed of as not pressed

however, reserving liberty to the appellant to approach the

Karnataka Wakf Tribunal in accordance with law.

Sd/-

JUDGE

NB*