JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) The plaintiff is the appellant against this judgment of reversal. The plaintiff
filed a suit being Title Suit No.162 of 1978 in the Court of learned Munsif, 4
th
Court,
Burdwan alleging inter alia that properties described in schedule A, B and B1 were
the properties of the plaintiff Wakf Estate. One Abdul Sovan Sarkar was the
Mutwalli of the plaintiff Wakf Estate. Due to his inability the Commissioner of
Wakfs appointed one Abdul Aziz Sarkar as co-mutwalli. Abdul Sovan Sarkar died in
1364 B. S. leaving behind proforma defendant 2-5 and widow Azema Bibi (since
deceased) as his heirs. After death of Abdul Sovan Sarkar one of his sons namely,
Rawswa Ali Sarkar was appointed co-mutwalli by the Commissioner of Wakf with
the consent of other mutwalli Abdul Aziz Sarkar. The suit properties were all along
wakf properties and not personal properties of any of the mutwallis. Suit properties
appertaining to khatian No.84 and 86 of Mouza Mollasarul and Khatian No.15 of
Mouza Simasimi were dedicated to the plaintiff Wakf Estate before C. S. record but
due to inadvertence and erroneously those were recorded as personal properties of
Abdul Sovan Sarkar. Abdul Sovan Sarkar later executed a deed of disclaimer on
23.05.1944 in respect of those properties wherein he admitted that those were wakf
properties all along. C. S. plot No.7908 of khatian No.321 of Mouza Mollasarul was
purchased by the plaintiff Wakf Estate from one Fakiran Bibi by a unregistered deed
dated 27
th
of August, 1938 on payment of Rs.11/- and since then it was in the
possession of the Wakf Estate. The properties appertaining to Khatian No.1520 of
Mouza Mollasarul as described in the schedule A and B in the plaint were taken in
settlement for permanent tenancy by the plaintiff Wakf Estate through its Mutwallis
namely Abdul Sovan Sarkar and Abdul Aziz Sarkar in the year 1354 B.S. and 1355
B. S. respectively. Since then the plaintiff Wakf Estate was in possession of those
properties more than 12 years openly and has acquired a title thereupon through
adverse possession also. The plaintiff Wakf Estate gifted the properties in Schedule
B-1 long ago to the proforma defendant No.6 who was in possession of the same
since then for running a school. Revenue Officer, Galsi Settlement Camp started a
B. R. Case No.471 (C) V against Abdul Sovan Sarkar treating the suit properties as
personal properties of Abdul Sovan Sarkar and without serving any notice and / or
giving any opportunity of being heard to the plaintiff Wakf Estate passed an order of
vesting of the suit property on 11.04.1972 being excess lands of Abdul Sovan Sarkar.
The heirs of Abdul Sovan Sarkar submitted a return in Form-B in respect of their
personal properties. The suit properties were not included in said return as those
were properties of the Wakf Estate and not the personal properties of their father.
Said order of vesting of Revenue Officer was illegal and void. Though the plaintiff
Wakf Estate was never an intermediary or had any lands in excess of ceiling limit,
and was under no obligation to submit any return, but to avoid trouble submitted a
return through its Mutwallis in Form-B in respect of its properties for retention and
sent the same under registered post on 21.08.1972 which was duly received by the
authority. But the order of vesting which clouded the title of the plaintiff Wakf
Estate over suit properties was not vacated. Hence is this suit after giving notice
under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(2.) The defendant No.7 the Commissioner of Wakf contested the suit by filing
written statement. Supporting the claim of the plaintiff Wakf Estate it was asserted
that suit properties were properties of the Wakf Estate and not the personal properties
of the Mutwallis and that Mutwallis were directed to take proper steps so that suit
properties are declared as Wakf properties and not personal properties of the
Mutwallis.
(3.) The defendant State (defendant No.1) filed a written statement denying
material allegations of the plaint and contending inter alia that Abdul Sovan Sarkar
had excess lands both agricultural and non-agricultural including the suit properties
on the date of vesting and that a big raiyat case was accordingly started against him
wherein his legal heirs submitted Form-B and as per said Form-B they did not retain
the suit properties and hence there was order of vesting of the same. The suit
properties were never treated as Wakf properties and rather those were personal
properties and it was correctly recorded in both C. S. and R.S. record of rights. The
suit was liable to be dismissed.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.