IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No. 3906 of 2009 Date of Decision: 16.7.2009 Khazan Chand and others ....Petitioners. Versus Punjab Wakf Board, Ambala Cantt. ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Mr. Malkeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. The defendant-petitioners have approached this Court by way of present revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the judgment and decree dated 29.7.2005 passed by the Wakf Tribunal, Nawanshahr, whereby the suit of the plaintiff- respondent for possession was decreed. By way of the present petition, the petitioner has approached this Court for setting aside the judgment and decree dated 29.7.2005 after a period of almost four years. The present petition is liable to be dismissed on account of delay and laches and even otherwise, the trial court while deciding issue No.2, i.e. “Whether plaintiff-Board is entitled to get the possession of 7 kanals 12 marlas of land fully described in the heading of the plaint from the defendants”, in paras 12 and 13 of its judgment has observed as under:- “12. I find force in the arguments of the learned CR No. 3906 of 2009 -2- counsel for the plaintiff. Admittedly, the property in dispute is the ownership of the plaintiff. Oral as well as documentary evidence also prove so. Only question to be determined which is of some importance, is whether the defendants who took this land on lease for a period of about two years, have any right, title or interest in the property in dispute. Perusal of the receipts Ex.D2 to Ex.D5 shows that defendant Gian Chand was given two kanals of land on lease for the period 1988-89 to 1990-91 and thereafter, lease has not been extended in favour of Gian Chand defendant, whereas other defendants have not placed on file any document in their favour, and they have no right, title or interest in the property in dispute and they are in unauthorized possession of the property in dispute. 13. So far as Gian Chand defendant is concerned, after 1990-91, he is also in unauthorized possession of the property in dispute. Under Section 56 of the Wakf Act, 1995, a lease or sub- lease for a period exceeding one year and not exceeding three years of any immovable property which is Wakf property is void and has no effect unless it is made with the previous sanction of the Board. Defendant Gian Chand CR No. 3906 of 2009 -3- has failed to produce on record any sanction of the Punjab Wakf Board extending the lease in his favour for a period of more than one year. Therefore, possession of defendant Gian Chand cannot be said to be legal in the eyes of law. The plea of the defendants that they have raised construction as per site plan Ex.D1 after spending huge amount and there is no graveyard, has also no force because the property is owned by the plaintiff and unauthorized occupation including unauthorized construction cannot create any right, title or interest in favour of Gian Chand or any other defendant who have not placed on file any document of lease even. If the plaintiff Board has not accepted the lease amount after 1990- 91, then also defendants cannot compel the plaintiff Board to accept the lease money. Non- acceptance of the lease amount itself is a notice of termination of the lease of defendant Gian Chand and no separate notice was required to be given and the plaintiff Board being owner of the property in dispute is entitled to seek its possession from the defendants.” In view of the above observations of the Wakf Tribunal, wherein no fault could be pointed out by the learned counsel and on CR No. 3906 of 2009 -4- account of delay and latches, no ground to exercise jurisdiction by this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is made out. Accordingly the petition is dismissed. July 16, 2009 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE