1 CRA NO. 79/2010. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.79/2010. Mohd. Abdul Khaliq s/o Mohd. Abdul and Ors. - APPLICANTS (orig.Plaintiffs) VERSUS Mohd. Amjadoddin Inayattur Rehman Khatib and Ors. - RESPONDENTS (orig.Defendants) ***** Mr.S.A.G.Qureshi,Advocate for Applicants; Mr.Ajay Shinde, Adv. for Respondenet No.1. Mr.Mr.MBW Khan, Adv. for Respondent No.6; Mr.SS Kazi, Adv. for Resp.Nos.7, 9, 16 to 25. ----- CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL,J. DATE : 30th November,2010. PER COURT: 1) Heard learned Counsel extensively. 2) Order of rejection of Exhibit-5 and thereby grant of ex parte temporary injunction dated 5.1.2009, being vacated in Wakf Suit No. 75/2008 by the learned Presiding Officer, Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad, is questioned by the plaintiffs/petitioners. 3) Defendant nos. 1 to 3 (Respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein) asserted to be in possession of the 2 CRA NO. 79/2010. property. An agreement of sale dated 14.3.2006 (page 101) relating to the suit property, is tendered, which has been entered into by defendant nos.1 to 3 in favour of an educational institution. This primarily and prima facie could not be done, considering the property to be wakf property with rights of several persons involved therein. 4) During the course of submissions, a grievance was put forward by Mr.Kazi, learned Counsel for the added defendant nos.7 to 25, that, it is the plaintiffs, who also are in search of prospective purchaser and are bent upon to alienate the suit property. 5) Mr.Qureshi, on instructions, makes a statement on behalf of the plaintiffs/petitioners that the petitioners have no such intention to dispose of the suit property nor during pendency of the petition before the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal, the petitioners shall enter into any third party transaction. This statement is accepted. 6) Now, considering the orders recorded by the learned Sub Divisional Officer, Parbhani dated 27.4.2009, rejecting the appeal of the respondent nos.1 to 3, thereby confirming the entries in the name of the petitioners/plaintiffs, and other record, showing the cultivation by the petitioners/plaintiffs, 3 CRA NO. 79/2010. the injunction is necessary to be made operative against the defendant nos.1, 2 and 3. In the set of above situation, the order under challenge requires to be interfered with as the learned Presiding Officer of the Wakf Tribunal has referred to Collector’s order. However, it is no where reflected, giving impression that the order of Sub Divisional Officer dated 27.4.2009 has reached finality. 7) In the above scenario, the order under challenge is interfered with. The injunction in terms of application Exhibit-5 in the above proceedings, is granted in favour of the plaintiffs/petitioners, with the statement that the petitioners/plaintiffs shall not create any third party rights in relation to the suit property, till disposal of the proceedings. The Defendant nos.1, 2 and 3 will also not enter into any sale transaction in relation to the suit property. 8) Civil Revision Application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/