SC: CIRP Need Not Be Set Aside Solely for Fraudulent Filing of Section 9 Plea  ||  Supreme Court: Compromise Decree Passed Without Impleading Necessary Party is Void  ||  SC: Cheque Dishonour Notice Valid if Sent to Drawer’s Address and Received by Family  ||  J&K&L HC: Minority During Attestation Cannot Justify Decades-Long Delay in Challenging Mutation  ||  Bombay HC: WhatsApp Circulation of Objectionable Photos Can Attract SC/ST Act  ||  J&K&L HC: Cardiac Arrest From Stress of Long-Distance Driving is Compensable  ||  Delhi HC: Accused Cannot Delay Trial and Then Rely on Delay to Seek Bail  ||  Calcutta HC: Insurer Must Compensate Child’s Accidental Death Despite Driver’s Fake Licence  ||  Bombay HC Tells X to Take Down Defamatory Post Targeting Serum Institute, CEO Adar Poonawalla  ||  Delhi High Court Restores Arbitral Award in DMRC’s Favour Passed by Employee-Arbitrator    

Lal Shah Baba Dargah Trust and ors v. Magnum Developers and ors - (Supreme Court) (15 Dec 2015)

Single member Waqf Tribunal keeps jurisdiction till larger constituted

Civil

A challenge by Waqf Tribunals against a High Court finding jurisdiction for itself in matters involving waqf property was allowed by the Supreme Court. The Court considered if, after the 2013 amendments to the Waqf Act, 1995, which constituted a three member Tribunal, a one member Tribunal could continue to hear matters till such larger panel was constituted. It rejected contentions that the amendment had impliedly repealed provisions giving authority to waqf tribunals. It noted that the earlier law was not replaced by amendments in 2013, with both being able to stand alongside.

Relevant : Om Prakash Shukla v. Akhilesh Kumar Shukla MANU/SC/0478/1986 Municipal Council, Palai vs. T.J. Joseph MANU/SC/0032/1963 Section 83 Waqf Act, 1995 Act

Tags : WAQF   TRIBUNAL   AMENDMENT   IMPLIED REPEAL  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved