Order 10

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: CS SCJ 1130/23
MOHD. ILMAN Vs. MOHD. IQBAL
03.06.2024
Present: Shri Iqballuddin, Ld. Counsel for plaintiff.
Defendant in person.
Shri Mohd. Waquas, Ld. Counsel for applicant
Delhi Waqf Board through VC.
Matter is fixed for orders on application under order
1 Rule 10 CPC and under or-2-der 7 Rule 11 CPC.
Vide this order I shall decide the application under
order 1 Rule 10 CPC.
The arguments on said application has already been
heard on LDOH. In view of the said arguments the undersigned
has carefully perused record and annexed documents.
The present application under order 1 Rule 10 CPC
has been filed on behalf of Delhi Waqf Board for impleading as
co defendnat in the present matter as it is submitted by way of
present application that property in question regarding which the
relief of permanant injunction is sought by plaintiff i.e bearing
no.1528 to 1538 main road, farash khana, Delhi-110006 belongs
to Delhi Waqf Board as per notification dated 10.04.1979 of
Delhi Administration. Accordingly, it is prayed that Delhi Waqf
Board is a necessary party to present suit and impleaded as co-
defendant in view of section 92 of Waqf Act.
The said application has been objected by plaintiff
mainly on two grounds firstly, that the relief sought by plaintiff is
an existing defendants from defendant no.1 to 9 and not against
Delhi Waqf board and therefore dismissed as they are not the
party to the suit. It is further objected that the notification of 1979
-- 1 of 3 --
-2-
relied by the applicnat is a forged and fabricated documents. The
said application is also objected on the ground that the same has
been filed by section officer having no authority on behalf of
Delhi Waqf board.
The undersigned has carefully perused the record,
the notification of 1979 whereby property in question in respect
of which relief is claimed by plaintiff are held to be properties
Wakf Masjid Akhundji. Though the Ld. Counsel for plaintiff has
objected to the said document being forged and fabricated but the
same is matter of trial. Also the fact that the section officer who
has filed application under order 1 Rule 10 CPC for impleadment
as party is duly authorised or not is also a matter of trial. In the
opinion of the court, the property in question which though stated
by plaintiff is to be purchased from one Shri Deepak Sachar on
21.11.2022 as per the notification of Delhi Administration falls
under the ownership of Wakf Masjid Akhundji. The perusal of
plaint of the plaintiff also shows that the property in question has
or had relation with the Delhi Waqf Board and presently the
property of plaintiff belongs to Delhi Waqf Board or not can be
decided only by way of trial. Further on the LDOH during
arguments it came on record that plaintiff has filed a suit before
Delhi Waqf Tribunal for declaring himself as owner of the suit
property.
In view of the above facts and circumstanceof present case,
in the opinion of this court, Delhi Waqf Board is a necessary
party to the present suit as any order with respect to the property
in question will effect the interest of the Board. Accordingly,
Delhi Waqf Board is impleaded as co-defendant in present suit
-- 2 of 3 --
-3-
and application under order 1 Rule 10 CPC is hereby allowed.
Ld. Counsel for plaintiff is directed to file amended
memo of parties.
Further the application under order 7 Rule 11 CPC
filed on behalf of defendant no.1 shall be considered on NDOH
and the Ld. Counsel for plaintiff is directed to satisfy this court
regarding the maintainability of present suit before this court.
Put up for consideration on application on under
order 7 Rule 11 CPC on 30.07.2024.
(Neha Pandey)
Civil Judge-05/Central/THC
03.06.2024
-- 3 of 3 --