Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Supreme Court Bars Post-Divorce Maintenance Claims When Wife Voluntarily Waived Maintenance In Settlement Agreement Advocate Is An Officer Of Court, Not Mere Agent Of Client: Allahabad High Court Distinguishes Between Active Concealment & Statement In Ignorance, Slaps Cost On Litigants For Misleading Bench Cannot Summon Accused Mechanically On Protest Petition Without Assigning Justifiable Reasons: Andhra Pradesh High Court Increment Not A Bounty: Allahabad High Court Rules Public Holiday Cannot Delay Pay Hike For Teachers Joining Next Working Day Paying Taxes Or Utility Connections Confer No Legal Ownership Over Govt Land': Andhra Pradesh High Court Orders Demolition Of Encroachment 'Cannot Compel Public Authority To Collect Data From Private Bodies': Bombay High Court Quashes CIC Orders Directing SEBI To Procure BSE Records Under RTI Act Section 10 CPC Cannot Stay Previously Instituted Title Suit Pending Subsequent Probate Case; Inherent Powers Under Section 151 Inapplicable When Probate Dismissed: Calcutta High Court Mere Phone Calls Without Transcripts No Ground For Murder Conspiracy: Delhi High Court Clear Violation Of Section 42 NDPS Act': Gujarat High Court Holds Failure To Record Secret Info In Writing Fatal When Police Officer Had Time To Act JK High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Cop Accused Of Threatening Advocate Over Phone Call Without Prior Sanction Under Section 197 CrPC Custody Unwarranted For Mere Formalities Once Weapon Is Recovered: Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail In BNS Axe Attack Case Circumstances Of Crime Can Be Assessed During Trial: High Court Upholds Trial Of Minor As Adult Under JJ Act In Murder Case Statutory Deposit Under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC Is A Sine Qua Non; Litigant Cannot Stall Auction Sale By Merely Blaming Counsel: Madras High Court Ban Junk Food Within 50 Metres Of Schools: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Moto Cognizance To Enforce FSSAI Norms, Protect Children From Obesity

Supreme Court Rules Suit Land Not Established as Wakf Property; Dismisses Appeals

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India ruled that the suit land in question, which was the subject of a dispute between the Salem Muslim Burial Ground Protection Committee and the State of Tamil Nadu, was not established as a Wakf property. The court dismissed the appeals challenging the High Court's decision and affirmed that the land did not meet the requirements for being considered a Wakf property under Muslim law.

The controversy revolved around Zamin Survey Nos. 5105 and 5108 in Salem Zameen Estate, known as the "suit land." The claimants, who alleged to have acquired rights over the land through their predecessors-in-interest, asserted their claims based on various grounds. However, the appellant Committee argued that the suit land was a burial ground and could not be settled with any private individual.

The court examined the evidence presented and observed that there was no explicit dedication of the suit land for any pious, religious, or charitable purpose, which is necessary for the creation of a Wakf property under Muslim law. It further noted that there was insufficient evidence to establish that the suit land was used as a burial ground prior to 1900 or 1867, the alleged period of burial activity. The court determined that the suit land could not be considered a Wakf property by express dedication or inferred dedication from usage.

Additionally, the court addressed the issue of the notification dated April 29, 1959, declaring the suit land as a Wakf property. It emphasized that such a declaration must follow the prescribed procedure under the Wakf Act, 1954, which includes conducting surveys, settling disputes, and submitting reports to the State Government and the Wakf Board. As there was no evidence to show that the required procedure was followed before issuing the notification, the court held that the notification was not conclusive proof of the suit land being a Wakf property.

The appellant Committee raised an argument regarding the jurisdiction of the High Court to issue a direction to consider the claims under Section 19A of the Tamil Nadu Estate (Abolition & Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948. However, the court found the argument lacking merit due to the appellant Committee's participation in the subsequent proceedings without objection or protest. It emphasized the principle of acquiescence and estoppel, stating that once a party accepts and participates in proceedings, it is estopped from disputing the jurisdiction or validity of the direction at a later stage.

Supreme Court dismissed the appeals for lack of merit and upheld the High Court's decision. The suit land was not recognized as a Wakf property, and no costs were awarded in the case.

D.D- 18.May.2023

SALEM MUSLIM BURIAL GROUND PROTECTION COMMITTEE    vs STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.   

Latest Legal News