A man purchased land in 2007. Later, when he tried to sell it, the Sub-Registrar objected & said that the land is Waqf property. Other people in the area also faced the same issue. So they filed petition.
In this case, Waqf Board's lawyers argued that the petitioners should approach the Waqf Tribunal as any disputes regarding Waqf property should be resolved by the Waqf Tribunal.
However, the Telangana High Court found the Waqf Board's arguments and evidence insufficient and ultimately ruled in favor of the petitioners.
The Telangana High Court also ruled that the Waqf Board cannot claim property merely by issuing a notification; the Waqf must provide evidence.
In this case, Waqf Board's lawyers argued that the petitioners should approach the Waqf Tribunal as any disputes regarding Waqf property should be resolved by the Waqf Tribunal.
However, the Telangana High Court found the Waqf Board's arguments and evidence insufficient and ultimately ruled in favor of the petitioners.
The Telangana High Court also ruled that the Waqf Board cannot claim property merely by issuing a notification; the Waqf must provide evidence.
A man purchased land in 2007. Later, when he tried to sell it, the Sub-Registrar objected & said that the land is Waqf property. Other people in the area also faced the same issue. So they filed petition.
In this case, Waqf Board's lawyers argued that the petitioners should approach the Waqf Tribunal as any disputes regarding Waqf property should be resolved by the Waqf Tribunal.
However, the Telangana High Court found the Waqf Board's arguments and evidence insufficient and ultimately ruled in favor of the petitioners.
The Telangana High Court also ruled that the Waqf Board cannot claim property merely by issuing a notification; the Waqf must provide evidence.
0 Comments
0 Shares
578 Views
0 Reviews