1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.23 OF 2009 Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders 1. Heard Advocate Shri S.S.Kazi, Advocate for the applicant, Shri Vivek Bhavthankar, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1,4,6, and 7 and Shri M.B.W. Khan Advocate for Respondent No.8. 2. This civil revision application is filed being aggrieved by order of refusal to allow applicant to be added as party to Appeal No.3 of 2006 pending before the Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad. 3. Briefly stated, it is the case of the present applicant that Second 2 Appeal No. 1098 of 1971 was filed in this High Court, dispute wherein was relating to some inam properties. Syed Rafiuddin Syed Kallimullah-the father of present revision applicant, was appellant No. 2 in the said Second Appeal, whereas Syed Mohiuddin Syed Gulam Mohiuddin-father of present Respondent No.1, was respondent No. 1 in the said Second Appeal. The said second appeal came to be compromised under which certain properties were allowed to the share of appellants and certain properties went to the share of respondents and the lands bearing survey No.21-A and 21-AA came to be allotted to the share of present applicant's father who was one of the appellants. 4. Subsequently, Wakf Board initiated proceedings on the ground that the Inamdars of the lands had sold the properties belonging to the Wakf. The Additional Collector, Beed (Atiyat), decided the proceedings bearing No. 2000/CD/1/Appeal/10 on 21.2.2006 and 3 directed the Tahsildar, Beed to take possession of certain lands situated at village Neknoor, District Beed and give the same on one year lease basis at a time and to credit the lease amount to the Wakf. One of the properties is said to be survey No.21. 5. As against the said order, proceedings are filed before Wakf Tribunal, bearing appeal No. 3 of 2006. Therein, an application was moved by present revision applicant for making him as party on the ground that although he did not sell any property, yet the properties i.e. survey Nos. 21- A and 21-AA in his possession were subject matter of possession and are being about to be let out on one year basis at a time. 6. It is argued on behalf of respondents herein that the present revision applicant is not necessary party. Along with application, 7x12 extracts were relied upon to show that 4 the present revision applicant having not sold property allotted to his share and being in actual possession of the same, possession of his land cannot be taken by the Wakf Board. 7. Considering the facts of the case, the copy of the decree in Second Appeal No.1098 of 2007 and considering interpretation by the learned Advocate of Wakf Board that survey No.21 includes Survey Nos. 21-A and 21-AA, in my opinion, the Wakf Tribunal ought to have allowed the application of the present applicant so that it could have heard the Inamdar who wants to contend that he had not sold his property and is in possession of the same and, therefore, should not be subject matter of the order by the Deputy Collector. 8. In the circumstances, civil revision application is allowed. The order passed by the Wak Tribunal on 22.1.2009 below application Exh.59 in Appeal No.3 of 2006 is hereby set 5 aside. The Wakf Tribunal is directed to allow the revision applicant to appear before it as one of the Respondents and place his case before the Tribunal. Date:12/10/2009 (P.R.BORKAR, J.) pnd/cra23.09