THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED C.R.P.No.4283 of 2011 ORDER The first respondent herein filed O.A.No.10 of 2011 in Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short ‘the Tribunal’), under Section 94(2) of Wakf Act, 1995 (for short ‘the Act’) claiming himself as a person interested in the Wakf under the definition of Section 3(k) of the Act. Along with the said application, he filed I.A.No.200 of 2011 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC and under Sections 83(5) & 94(2) of the Act seeking interim injunction against the petitioner herein being Mutawalli of the Wakf property and the other respondents herein, who are said to be the tenants in the Wakf property. By order dated 04.08.2011, the Tribunal while allowing the said I.A. in part, granted interim injunction restraining the petitioner Mutawalli from inducting any tenant or third party in any of the portions or spaces in the subject Wakf property henceforth from the date of the suit till the suit dispute is adjudicated, but declined granting injunction against the other respondents. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed the present civil revision petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record. 3. The petitioner was appointed as Mutawalli of the subject Wakf Property by the second respondent-Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board published in A.P.Gazette No.4 dated 23.01.2003. The nature and object of the said property is for burial and Fateha, whereas the petitioner contends that it is a private family grave yard and Maqbera of the wakf in which only the family members of the wakf are to be buried and no other muslim is entitled and that as his ancestor mutawallies were letting out the open space he is also doing the same using the rental income for the maintenance of the wakf property and for pious, religious and charitable purposes. The Tribunal after considering all the material on record held that the documents produced by the first respondent would show that the petitioner, the present Mutawalli and the earlier Mutawallies are letting out the sites of the subject Wakf property and leasing out the shops belongs to the Wakf for commercial activity as against the object of the Wakf and as such there is a prima facie case made out by the first respondent, balance of convenience is in his favour and irreparable loss and injury would also be caused to him if injunction is not granted. Insofar as the other respondents/tenants are concerned, the Tribunal held that since they have inducted by the landlord, they would get certain rights and as such they cannot be evicted without following due process of law and thereby, declined to grant injunction restraining their business activity. 4. In the light of the same, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order impugned. Hence, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J Date:21.10.2011 sj