<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1976 (3) TMI 231 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168153</link>
    <description>Long and continuous public use, supported by revenue and judicial records, may justify presuming a Muslim burial ground to be public, and the text states that a mosque becomes a public wakf when the founder divests ownership and allows public prayers; ancillary structures used for ablution, congregation, storage, and recitation are treated as part of the wakf. It also notes that earlier litigation did not operate as res judicata because the public character of the properties was not directly and substantially decided, that the section 55(2) bar under the Muslim Wakfs Act, 1954 did not apply absent a constituted Board, and that de facto managers of mismanaged wakf property may be proceeded against under section 92 CPC for a scheme of administration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2015 13:07:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=374537" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (3) TMI 231 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168153</link>
      <description>Long and continuous public use, supported by revenue and judicial records, may justify presuming a Muslim burial ground to be public, and the text states that a mosque becomes a public wakf when the founder divests ownership and allows public prayers; ancillary structures used for ablution, congregation, storage, and recitation are treated as part of the wakf. It also notes that earlier litigation did not operate as res judicata because the public character of the properties was not directly and substantially decided, that the section 55(2) bar under the Muslim Wakfs Act, 1954 did not apply absent a constituted Board, and that de facto managers of mismanaged wakf property may be proceeded against under section 92 CPC for a scheme of administration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168153</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>