Limitation Issue in Suit Filed under Section 6 of the Wakf Act, 1954

In a significant legal case concerning the Wakf Act, 1954, the Supreme Court of India delved into the limitation issue in a suit filed under Section 6 of the Act. The matter involved a dispute regarding the nature of a property and the declarations sought by the party. The Court examined the applicability of the statutory limitation period and its impact on the maintainability of the suit. Stay tuned to learn more about the intricate legal discussions and outcomes of this case.


  • The instant appeal challenges the concurrent finding of all three Courts below regarding the suit’s maintainability under Section 6 of the Wakf Act, 1954.
  • The issue in question is whether the suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff is barred by limitation as per the Act, 1954.
  • All three Courts have unanimously held that the suit is indeed barred by limitation and consequently not maintainable.
  • The appellant is appealing against this collective decision on the limitation issue.
  • The specific legal arguments and facts considered by the lower Courts in reaching this determination are central to the grounds of appeal.

Also Read: Restitution Order in the Case of Temple Management: High Court vs. State


  • Respondent’s counsel supports the finding of all three Courts.
  • Appellant filed the suit under Section 6 of the Act, 1954 after the statutory period of limitation.
  • Article 113 of the Limitation Act is deemed to have no application in this case.
  • Courts have unanimously found that the suit was not filed within the one-year statutory period under Section 6 of the Act, 1954.
  • Appellant cannot introduce a new plea at this stage, especially since it was not raised earlier.
  • Concurrent findings of fact are generally not interfered with unless proven to be perverse or unsustainable in law.
  • Section 56 of the Act, 1954 is stated to be inapplicable.
  • After properties are registered as wakf properties and the list of wakfs is published in the official gazette, the mechanism under Section 6 of the Act, 1954 stipulates filing a suit within one year.
  • No other remedy is deemed permissible under the law.

Also Read: Land Exchange Dispute: Upholding Validity of Deeds


  • The plaintiff filed a suit under Section 6 of the Act, 1954 seeking declarations regarding the nature of a property.
  • The declarations sought included that the property is not Wakf Allah but Wakf Alal Aulad.
  • The suit requested consequential orders directing the defendant to register the property as Wakf Alal Aulad.
  • The suit also demanded costs and any further orders deemed necessary for justice.
  • It is acknowledged that the subject property is a registered wakf under the Act, 1954.
  • The Act, 1954 was enacted to improve the administration and supervision of wakfs.
  • Chapter II of the Act provides the procedure for the survey of wakfs.
  • No suit can be instituted against the Board regarding actions taken under the Act until two months after a notice in writing is delivered to the Board.
  • The list of wakfs published under Section 5 is considered final and conclusive unless modified by a decision of the civil court.
  • The appellant’s defense is that the property has been wrongly declared as Wakf-Al-Allah.
  • The appellant argues that the suit filed was within the limitation period of one year as per Section 6 of the Act, 1954.
  • The submission referring to Section 56 of the Act, 1954 is deemed unsubstantial as it pertains to judicial proceedings under Chapter VII.
  • The Act mandates a survey of wakfs by the State Government through a Survey Commissioner.
  • Any disputes regarding wakfs listed in the Gazette can be challenged through a suit within the prescribed limitation period.
  • In this case, the property in question was declared as Wakf-Al-Allah in the Gazette dated 2 December, 1965.
  • The suit filed on 17 January, 1967, was beyond the one-year limitation period from the date of publication in the Gazette.
  • The Survey Commissioner’s report held the property as Wakf-Al-Allah and was not challenged in the suit.
  • The appellant’s argument that the property was Wakf-Alal-Aulad is dismissed as the survey report stands.
  • The Survey Commissioner’s inquiry empowered by the Act found the property to be Wakf-Al-Allah.
  • The suit was deemed time-barred as it exceeded the limitation period prescribed under Section 6 of the Act, 1954.
  • The appellant cannot invoke Section 56 of the Act, 1954 in their defense.
  • Section 56 of the Act, 1954 has no application in the instant case.
  • No error was found in the orders passed by the Courts below.
  • The appeal lacks substance and is dismissed.
  • Pending application(s) have been disposed of.

Also Read: Land Dispute: Legal Battle between Smt. Harinder Singh Ghuman and Lt. Col. Paramjit Singh Dhillon


Case Number: C.A. No.-007130-007130 / 2010

Click here to read/download original judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *