The Rajasthan High Court ruled that a mosque falls under the definition of ‘Waqf,’ and any disputes regarding such properties must be adjudicated by the Waqf Tribunal. The case involved a dispute over the Madina Zama Masjid, where the petitioners (defendants) claimed ownership of the property. The court emphasized that matters related to Waqf properties should be resolved within the specialized tribunal rather than civil courts.
The Rajasthan High Court ruled that a mosque, as a place designated for religious activities such as prayer (Namaz), is classified as “Waqf” under Section 3(r) of the Waqf Act, 1995.
Consequently, any disputes relating to it must be exclusively addressed by a Waqf Tribunal, with civil courts lacking jurisdiction in these matters.
The Court highlighted this point by referencing Section 85 of the Waqf Act, which prohibits civil and revenue courts from handling cases involving waqf properties, mandating that such issues be resolved by a Waqf Tribunal.
Also Read: Union Cabinet Approves Proposed Changes Of Waqf (Amendment) Bill After JPC Report
The case centered on a dispute regarding the Madina Zama Masjid, where the petitioners (defendants) claimed rightful ownership of the mosque property. The original plaintiffs (respondents) sought a permanent injunction to prevent the defendants from disrupting the mosque’s use by the Muslim community for religious activities such as Namaz.
Justice Birendra Kumar stated,
“It is undisputed that a mosque is a place used for religious purposes like praying Namaz; therefore, it falls within the definition of ‘Waqf.’ Once the property in question is recognized as Waqf, any dispute regarding it must be adjudicated solely by the Waqf Tribunal, as indicated by the bar under Section 85 of the Waqf Act.”
Advocate Roshan Lal represented the petitioners, while Advocate Moti Singh appeared for the respondents.
The petitioners argued that the matter should be heard by a Waqf Tribunal because it pertained to waqf property, not a civil court.
However, the civil court dismissed their request under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, claiming that the mosque was not registered as a waqf property, and thus the jurisdiction of civil courts was not restricted.
Upon reviewing the case, the Rajasthan High Court disagreed with the lower court’s ruling, clarifying that a mosque dedicated for religious purposes qualifies as a waqf under Muslim law, irrespective of its formal registration.
The court concluded that any dispute related to a waqf property must be addressed by the Waqf Tribunal in accordance with the Waqf Act. The High Court allowed the civil revision petition, stating that the civil court had exceeded its jurisdiction.
The bench ordered the rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC and granted the plaintiffs four weeks to approach the Waqf Tribunal to resolve the issue.
Cause Title: Shakur Shah & Anr. v. Eliyas & Ors., [2025:RJ-JD:10292]
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
