IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA
DATED mxs THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH, 20
BEFORE
THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE
WRIT PETITION No.80308VoF.'120T10'TT{§m;%cf>é%)~. f'
BETWEEN
IMAM SA}-IEB
DEAD BY LRS
1.RAHMATBE,E V
W/OIMAM SAHEB, A
AGED _
occ.HoIJsE,«H0L1) *
&AQRICULi%URfii;,"'
R/O '
TQ. BASAVKALYAN,
DIST. BI'D.AFi, " X A
2. A...
= - _ S;r".O:'H§._/£AI»!IASAHEB;"' '
A AGED 35 YEARS.
CCC. AGRIVCTIILTURE.
% R/Q«ViLLAG~E"BHOSAGA.
T9. BASAVKALYAN.
3. SHABBIR.
, s IMAM SAHEB.
'-- _AGI_i2}D 36 YEARS,
I\J
OCC. ARTISAN,
R/O VILLAGE BHOSGA.
TQ. BASAVKALYAN.
4. RAZIA BEGUM.
D/O IMAM SAHEB,
AGED 31 YEARS.
OCC. HOUSEHOLD,
R/O VILLAGE BHOSGA,
TQ. BASAVKALYAN,
DIST. BIDAR.
5. SHAHEDA BEGUM,
D /O IMAM SAHEB.
AGED 30 YEARS, «
OCC. HOUSEHOLD, ,
R/O VILLAGE BHOSGA; _
TQ. BASAVKALYAN, ~
DIST. EIOAE; r
(BY SZRIM , 1
AND _ . , ,_
1. NABI GS'/.O 'GffiJf)¥j
MAJOR, OCCLAGRICULTURE,
* , R,-50~\/fiI.LLAGE BHOSOA.
, TQ. BASA.V'£{ALYAN.
Gouszupm.
8/ MASTAN SAB,
MAJQR;;. OCC. NIL,
RIO VELLAGE BHOSGA,
~ « TQRBASAVKALYAN,
...PETITIONERS
DIST. BIDAR.
3. MODIN SAHEB,
MAJOR.
4. PEER SAHEB.
S / O IVIASTAN SAB,
MAJOR.
5. MALAN SAHEB.
S/O MASTAN SAB,
MAJOR.
6. SILAR SAHEB,
S/O MEHTAB SAB, 7 "
MAJOR.
7. MALIK SAHEB, V
s/0 MAHTAB'sA'B.
MAJOR, _ -- ~
ALL R/ 0. B'HE3:sGA;
TQ. BAsAvKA:,YA3:. %
DIST. BIDAR. k = L
8. ISIVMIL V
* M s/Z0 C_HA.ND
A DIVED_B.',(.'
SA
s/O0 1sMA.i£..sAHEB,
MAJOR,'
occ. AGRICULTURE,
= R,/Q BHOSGA,
<;:g.jBAsAvKALYAN,
DIST. BIDAR.
9. MEHBOOB SAHEB.
S/O ISMAIL SAHEB.
DIED BY HIS LRS.
9A. MEHTAB BEE.
W/O MALANG SAB.
MAJOR,
OCC. HOUSEHOLD.
R/O BHOSGA.
TQ. BASAVKALYAN,
DIST. BIDAR.
10. KHAJA SAHEB,
S/OISMAIL SAHEB,-H_ -
MAJOR, OCC. AGRICIJ:LTL7RE,'v
R/O BHOSGA,
TQ. BASAVKALYAN, A if V
DIST. B1DAR."'«A._O_'-- A
11. :'AKARi\IAi*;a§:A' BOARD OF
WAKFS. '1'-HROU'GH_ ITSSECRETARY,
BANGALORE. '
12, 3 MEHTAB SAHEB,
" * _ AOEOO%~35yEARSA;AAOCc. NIL,
A R/O BHOSGA,
*rQ';'BAsAV1<:ALYAN.
~D"I-ST. ...RESPONDENTS
=!==!==i==!==!i=
This Writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and
227 of the Constitution of India. praying to issue a writ
of certiorari, quashing the order dated 22. 3.22009
passed by the Wakf Tribunal on IA No.2} un_der’-‘Order
VI Rule 17 r/w Section 151 of CPC, the certified..celpy”‘of
which is at Annexure H and amendm.ent_”of pla’ii3t””se~–.p
allowed, and etc., ‘ it
This petition coming
this day, the Court made the followhjg: ‘ ‘
This is the plaintiffs——pet:j.tic-n. .lSl’uit. is-E filed for
declaration and injunction’ of a decree
in the civil C£}l.i1″t._ _:’file.:Vo’i”_Civi1fdiidge (Sr. Dn.) at
is transferred from Civil Judge
(Sr. on), .l=Bidar, to the Wakf Tribunal,
Gu1ba.rga.4ll4″ir1d’the 2003. It appears during the
l V. pendeincybf thedproceedings an application is moved by
to amend the plajnt so as to take up a
legal e’oi1-tention that the order passed by the Land
Tribunal is null and void and also it shall not be given
‘effect to. Apparently, the learned member of the %
( €
(.
_ a
6
Tribunal was of the View that such a course cannot be
adopted inasmuch as that is not a forum to decide and
hence rejected the application.
Another reason given by the Tribunal 1’s…that~..the
suit is pending since 2003 and three
already been examined and the eyficlence’ “is”co_mii’1g”tco an
end. Hence I am of the ‘that.
entertaining the applicatiorffor aInend.mient’rV.__W”ouid not’
be in justifiable course. IAani’=no’t.,_inc1inedA to} interfere
with the order. Petition; of accordingly.
But h_owe’ver”the petitioner to raise the
same gro’u_ntd.s proceedings.
sax»
3UDGE