Only civil courts can handle wakf property cases

A suit seeking eviction of tenants from wakf property can be filed only before a competent civil court and not before the Wakf Tribunal constituted in the State, the Supreme Court has held.


Giving this ruling, a Bench consisting of Justices Markandey Katju and T.S. Thakur set at rest different interpretations given by various High Courts regarding the jurisdiction of civil courts to entertain petitions relating to wakf properties.

No jurisdiction

The High Courts of Andhra Pradesh, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Kerala and Punjab and Haryana had held that the civil courts had no jurisdiction in respect of disputes that concerned any wakf property.

The High Courts of Madras, Allahabad, Bombay and Karnataka, however, took the view that civil courts had jurisdiction.

The appeals arose as the Andhra Pradesh Wakf Tribunal held that it was competent to entertain and adjudicate upon disputes regarding eviction of tenants occupying wakf properties. The Andhra Pradesh High Court affirmed this order.

Common question

Since a common question was raised in similar appeals, the Bench took up for consideration all the appeals together.

Writing the judgment, Justice Thakur said to interpret Section 83 of the Wakf Act, 1995 to exclude jurisdiction of civil courts was not legally correct, for that provision dealt with constitution of Tribunals and the procedure which the Tribunals should follow.

The Bench noted that there was nothing in this Section to suggest that it excluded the jurisdiction of civil courts. Further, the Bench pointed out that the Act “does not provide for any proceedings before the Tribunal for determination of a dispute concerning the eviction of a tenant in occupation of a wakf property or the rights and obligations of the lessor and the lessees of such property. A suit seeking eviction of the tenants from what is admittedly wakf property could, therefore, be filed only before the civil court and not before the tribunal.”

The Bench held that the views of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and four other High Courts were not correct and the decisions of the High Court of Madras and three other High Courts were correct.

Appeals allowed

While allowing the appeals, the Bench made it clear that this judgment would not prevent the Wakf Board from instituting, if so advised, appropriate civil action before the competent civil court for redress in accordance with law.