1 CRA NO.48/2008. 1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.48/2008. (Sajid Mohd. Ali Kapli and Anr. Vs. Fahad Khalil Pathan and Ors.) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.SS Kazi, Adv. for applicants; *** CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL ,J. DATE : 30 th November, 2010. ... 1) Heard. 2) The learned Counsel for petitioners submits that presence of the petitioners herein in the on-going proceedings is imperative, as they are the interested parties, for which he relies to Section 3(k) of the Wakf Act, 1995, which reads as under : “3(k)”Person interested in a wakf” means any person who is entitled to receive any pecuniary or other benefits from the wakf and includes, - (i) any person who has a right to worship or to perform any religious rite in a mosque, idgah, imambara, dargah, khangah, maqbara, graveyard or any other religious institutions connected with the wakf or to participate in any 2 CRA NO.48/2008. religious or charitable institution under the wakf; (ii) The wakif and any descendant of the wakif and the mutawalli.” 3) There cannot be a contest on the definition, as to who is a person interested in respect of any Wakf. It may that the present petitioners are residing in nearby area of the masjid, however, that by itself would not make them eligible and entitle to be impleaded as party/respondents in the on-going litigation. The provisions of Order 1 rule 10(2) CPC magnify as to who should be arrayed as a party in the litigation, the impleadment may not be by application, even it can be at the instance of the court, provided the court, at any stage of the proceedings, finds to be just that name of any party as plaintiff or defendant ought to have been joined, whose presence before the court should be necessary in order to enable the court effectually and completely to adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the suit. The Court would naturally entertain such application or sou motu direct impleadment. No such eventuality has emerged in the proceedings as the applicants/petitioners could not point their involvement or that they will be 3 CRA NO.48/2008. legally prosecuting the matter by attending the proceedings as litigant.. The learned Judge has observed that the application of the third party (petitioners) is in collusion with the applicants, as despite the original applicants have knowledge of passing of the order on Exhibit-32, dated 17.11.2007, being on Exhibit-1, it is dragged. 4) Considering these aspects, the order dated 21.2.2008, passed by learned Presiding Officer, Maharashtra WAKF Tribunal, Aurangabad, does not call for any interference. No illegality. Civil Revision Application dismissed. No costs. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/