Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pb.Wakf Board And Ors vs M.C.Patiala on 16 April, 2024
Author: Anil Kshetarpal
Bench: Anil Kshetarpal
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:051720
RSA-1663-1993(O&M) 2024:PHHC:051720
1
148 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
RSA-1663-1993(O&M)
Date of decision :16.04.2024
Punjab Wakf Board and another ...Appellants
Vs.
Municipal Committee Patiala
and others ...Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL
Present: Mr. Lalit Singla, Advocate and
Ms. Varsha Sharma, Advocate
for the appellants.
Mr. H.P.S.Ghuman, Advocate
for the respondents No. 1 and 2.
Mr. Kanav Singla, AAG, Punjab
for respondent No.3.
Mr. Sandeep Khunger, Advocate and
Mr. Pankaj Samania, Advocate
for respondent No.5 (in COCP-2647-2011).
Mr. Mayank Mathur, Advocate
for the applicant (in CM-3891-C-2015).
Mr. Salil Sagar, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Sankalp Sagar, Advocate
for the applicant/respondent No.4 (in CM-4792-C-2015).
Mr. R.S. Randhawa, Advocate and
Mr. Taranum Madan, Advocate, for
for the applicant (in CMs No.5009-10-C-2013)
****
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. (Oral)
1. In this regular second appeal, the plaintiff assails the
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:051720
RSA-1663-1993(O&M) 2024:PHHC:051720
correctness of concurrent findings of fact arrived at by the Courts
below while partly decreeing plaintiff's suit with respect to land
measuring 17 kanals 11 marlas, whereas, dismissing the suit qua land
measuring 107 kanals 01 marla.
2. In order to comprehend the issues involved in the present
case, relevant facts in brief are required to be noticed.
3. The plaintiff claims that the suit property is a Wakf
property, which vests with the Wakf Board and in the revenue record,
it is recorded as graveyard and Mosque. The Municipal Committee,
Patiala has illegally occupied the same. The Municipal Committee
while contesting the suit claimed that the property was part of the
shamlat deh of village Arain Majra, which subsequently vested in the
Municipal Committee as the village came within municipal limits. It
was also claimed that the land measuring 17 kanals 11 marlas is not in
possession of the Municipal Committee and after 1947, the land is
being used for common/public purpose and never used for graveyard.
4. Both the Courts below upon appreciation of evidence
came to the conclusion that only 17 kanals 11 marlas is proved to be
used for graveyard and mosque. Hence, the suit qua that has been
decreed. It has been held that originally the property was barred of
shamlat deh of village Arain Majra and the revenue entry in jamabandi
for the year 1984-85 showing that the Punjab Wakf Board has
purchased the property is also incorrect because no sale deed has been
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:051720
RSA-1663-1993(O&M) 2024:PHHC:051720
produced.
5. Learned counsel representing the appellants submits that
in the revenue record, the property is used for 'ahl-e-islaam'. He
submits that once there is an entry in the revenue record showing that
the property is being used with reasons belonging to Muslim religion,
the suit has been wrongly dismissed.
6. Learned counsel representing the appellants admits that
the plaintiff has not even produced notification allegedly issued in the
year 1971, to prove that the property was ever notified as the Wakf
property.
7 Moreover, in a recent judgment passed by the Supreme
Court in 'Salem Muslim Burial Ground Protection Committee vs.
State of Tamil Nadu and others' 2023 AIR Supreme Court 2769, it
has been held that in absence of any evidence of valid creation of Wakf
in respect of the suit property, the declaration that the property is Wakf
cannot be granted. A publication of notification in the official gazette
has presumption of knowledge to the general public. However, such
notification is not conclusive. Unless, it is proved that a proper survey
was conducted and there is evidence of valid creation of Wakf, no
declaration that the suit property is Wakf can be granted.
8. In this case, as already noticed the Wakf Board has not
produced the notification. No evidence has been led to prove that there
was any valid creation of Wakf with respect to the suit property.
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:051720
RSA-1663-1993(O&M) 2024:PHHC:051720
9. Hence, no ground to interfere is made out.
10. Dismissed.
11. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also
disposed of.
(ANIL KSHETARPAL)
16.04.2024 JUDGE
neeraj Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes No
Whether Reportable : Yes No
4 of 4
