High Court of Gujarat
SARKHEJ ROZA COMMITTEE THROUGH ITS TRUSTEE/MUTAWALLI DILAWARHUSSAIN MIRSHBMIYA SAIYEDversusBHAVINSINGH MEGHSINGH
- Disposal
- 26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE
- Bench
- C DOSHI
Holding
The Court dismissed the revision applications, holding that the reasons in CRA No.84 of 2025 apply and the petitions lack merit.
Summary
The petitioner, Sarkhej Roza Committee, challenged a Waqf Tribunal order that dismissed its plaint for insufficient court fees and improper valuation under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The petitioner argued that CPC provisions do not apply to Waqf suits under the Waqf Act, 1995, and that the Tribunal erred in rejecting the plaint. The High Court noted that the issues were identical to those decided in its earlier judgment CRA No.84 of 2025 and that the same reasoning should apply. Relying on that precedent, the Court found the revision applications devoid of merit. Consequently, all the petitions were dismissed and the matter was closed.
Issues considered
- Whether provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, particularly Order 7 Rule 11 relating to court fees and jurisdiction, apply to suits instituted under the Waqf Act, 1995.
- Whether the Waqf Tribunal erred in rejecting the plaint on the ground of insufficient court fees.
Legislation cited
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908s. Order 7 Rule 11
- Waqf Act, 1995s. 83(9)
Subjects
Waqf ActCourt feeJurisdictionCode of Civil ProcedureRevision applicationWaqf Tribunal
Judgment
C/CRA/279/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/03/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 279 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 283 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 284 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 286 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 290 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 301 of 2025
==========================================================
SARKHEJ ROZA COMMITTEE THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED TRUSTEE/
MUTAWALLI
Versus
UKARSINGH MEGHSINGH & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
RIZWAN SHAIKH(7146) for the Petitioner
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for the Opponent(s) No. 1,2
MR VA BUKHARI(2891) for the Opponent(s) No. 3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 03/03/2026
COMMON ORAL ORDER
1. The issues raised in these group of petitions are
interlinked involving identical factual matrix, common
disputes and subsequently stand on same footing and
therefore, with the consent of learned advocates for the
respective parties, all these petitions are being disposed of by
this common order.
2. This batch of petitions led u/s 83(9) of the Waqf Act,
Page 1 of 3
C/CRA/279/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/03/2026
1995 challenging impugned judgment and order passed by the
learned Waqf Tribunal in Waqf suits, whereby the learned
Tribunal, in exercise of jurisdiction under Order 7 Rule 11 of
the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short “the Code”),
rejected the plaint on the ground of paying insu0icient Court
fees for the purpose of jurisdiction and Court fee, after giving
su0icient opportunity to make good.
3. These revisions are led mainly on the ground that
provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 would not
apply to the Waqf suit led under the Waqf Act and
subsequently, since there is no provision made in the Waqf
Act to pay Court fee in Waqf suit. The learned Tribunal has
committed serious and manifest error to reject the plaint
under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code.
4. It is noticeable that in the Waqf suit, the original plainti0
has asked the relief to recover vacant and peaceful possession
of the demised premises along with mesne pro t. The suits
are led without paying su0icient Court fees and the suits
were not properly valued for the purpose of jurisdiction and
Court fee.
5. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.
6. In their utter fairness, learned advocates appearing for
the respective parties submit that the issue raised in these
petitions are squarely covered and governed by the judgment
delivered by this Court dated 17.12.2025 rendered in CRA
No.84 of 2025 and other allied matters and therefore, there is
Page 2 of 3
C/CRA/279/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/03/2026
no need to pass any reasoned order repeating same reasons
assigned by this Court in the aforestated judgment. Thus,
they pray that all these petitions be disposed of by observing
that the reasons ascribed by this Court in CRA No.84 of 2025
and other allied matters be governed for disposal of these
petitions.
7. Learned advocate for the petitioner further submitted
that not pressing for reiteration of some reasons, as held by
this Court, may not come in the way of the petitioners herein
to pursue challenge against these reasons.
8. Under the circumstances, the reasons ascribed by this
Court in judgment delivered by this Court dated 17.12.2025
rendered in CRA No.84 of 2025 and other allied matters shall
pari passu govern and apply for disposal of present petitions
treating the same reasons as reasons ascribed for disposal of
present petitions.
9. Resultantly, present petitions being devoid of merits,
stand dismissed accordingly. Notice discharged.
10. Registry to maintain copy of this order in each matter.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
SHEKHAR P. BARVE
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: SHEKHAR PRAFULBHAI BARVE(HC00200), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 03/03/2026 14:51:42
Page 3 of 3
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "Waqf Act"Sign in to search