Jaswant Singh, J. - (1.) C.M. No. 8614 -CII of 2014.
(2.) THIS is an application for reopening the date of the main case which is already pending for 2.9.2014 or in the alternative for staying the dispossession of the petitioner from the property in question. The said application came up for hearing before this Court on 8.5.2014 and considering the reasons mentioned in the application, notice was issued for 15.05.2014 i.e. Today. Both counsel for the parties are present before this Court and have consented that the main case be taken up for hearing today itself. In view of the consented stand, the CM is allowed and the main case is being heard for disposal. C.R. No. 7583 of 2010 Petitioner/Plaintiff is in revision under Article 227 of the Constitution, aggrieved against the judgment and decree dated 7.8.2010 passed by the learned Wakf Tribunal, Amritsar whereby his suit for permanent injunction has been dismissed and the counter claim filed by the respondent Punjab Wakf Board seeking possession has been allowed. The sole argument raised by learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the Wakf Tribunal has no jurisdiction to try a case, whereby question of title is raised and has relied upon Ramesh Gobindram (deceased by L.Rs.) v. Sugra Humayun Mirza Wakf, : A.I.R. 2010 S.C. 2897. Further he has relied upon decision passed by this Court in CWP No. 9906 of 2010 titled as Pritpal Singh and another v. The Tribunal Wakf Act and another, whereby relying upon the judgment in Ramesh Gobindram's case (Supra), this Court had relegated the matter back for fresh adjudication. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondent has relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Board of Wakf West Bengal v. Anis Fatma Begum and another, : 2011(2) M.L.J. 219 whereby it has been held that any party who wishes to raise any dispute or matter relating to Wakf or Wakf Property has to first approach the Tribunal and the Wakf Tribunal has the jurisdiction to entertain such disputes. He has further relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CA No. 8194 of 2013 arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 9304 of 2011, titled as Punjab Wakf Board v. Pritpal and another, whereby the decision of Pritpal's case (supra), passed by this Court has been set aside and it has been held that a suit for possession is maintainable before Wakf Tribunal...
(3.) IN view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Board of Wakfs case (supra) as well as in Pritpal Singh case (Supra), there remains no iota of doubt that the learned Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain the present suit and thus the impugned judgment cannot be set aside on the basis of judgment relied upon by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ramesh Gobindram's case (supra). In view of the above, finding no merit in the present revision petition, the same is hereby dismissed.;