Aapka Consultant Judgment Series- In this series, we are providing case analysis of Landmark Judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
Wali Mohammed Khan (Dead) by LRs. v. Rahmat Bee & Ors
AIR 1999 SC 1136, [1999] 3 SCC 145
JUDGES: M. Jagannadha Rao and M.B. ShahDate of Decision: 23-02-1999
FACTS:-
The broad facts are, appellant-plaintiff, as mutawalli and the person in charge of the suit property, sued the respondent-defendant for possession of wakf properties. Earlier, the respondent-defendant had unsuccessfully filed a suit against the appellant-plaintiff, claiming possession of a house constructed in the suit property which comprised a graveyard and tombs. On facts, the respondent’s father and the respondent were found to be trustees of that house for performing Fateha at the tombs. The suit was decreed by the trial court. But on first appeal, Additional Chief Judge reversed the decree which was also confirmed by the High Court. Therefore this appeal was filed by the appellant-plaintiff and during pendency of this appeal plaintiff legal representatives have been brought on record.
ISSUE:-
Whether Mutawalli’s right to recover possession from the defendant was not time barred under S. 10 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963?
JUDGMENT:-
It was observed by the court that main part of S.10 states that no period of limitation applies for recovery of property from a trustee in whom the property is vested for a specific purpose, unless such a person is an assignee for valuable consideration. Further, the Explanation states that a person managing the property of a Hindu, Muslim or Buddhist religious or charitable endowments shall be deemed to be trustee of such property vested for a specific purpose.
In view of the Explanation to S. 10 of the Limitation Act, 1963 the respondent’s father who was managing the property has to be “deemed” to be a trustee in whom the properties vested specifically and in as much as the respondent was a donee and was not a transferee for valuable consideration S.10 applies and possession could be recovered from the defendant without any limitation as to time. Thus, the lower appellate court and the High Court made error in not noting that property could be recovered from the donee of a Mutavalli at any time in view of S.10 of the limitation act.
HELD:-
The appellant hold the right to recover possession from the trustees without any limitation period.
To Get Legal Opinion from Advocates/ Legal Experts, Please click here
To Get Legal Opinion from Retired Hon’ble Judges, Please click here
