Supreme Court Holds Civil Court Jurisdiction Not Barred in Sajjadanashin Disputes; Distinction Between Mutawalli and Spiritual Office Reaffirmed

Held: The Supreme Court held that disputes relating to succession or entitlement to the office of Sajjadanashin are not barred from civil court jurisdiction, as the office is fundamentally spiritual in nature and distinct from the administrative role of a Mutawalli; consequently, the Wakf Board does not have exclusive jurisdiction over such disputes.

Summary: The dispute concerned succession to the office of Sajjadanashin of a notified Dargah, where the Trial Court and First Appellate Court had concurrently declared the appellant as the rightful Sajjadanashin based on a valid nomination (Khilafathnama). The High Court, however, set aside these findings on the ground that the Wakf Board had exclusive jurisdiction, treating Sajjadanashin as falling within the definition of Mutawalli under the Wakf Act. Before the Supreme Court, the central issues were whether the offices of Mutawalli and Sajjadanashin are identical, and whether civil court jurisdiction is impliedly barred. The Court undertook a detailed analysis of the Wakf Act, 1995, and Islamic law principles, holding that while the definition of Mutawalli may include Sajjadanashin in certain contexts, the two offices are conceptually distinct—Mutawalli being a secular manager of waqf property, and Sajjadanashin being a spiritual head with religious functions. The Court further held that the powers of the Wakf Board are confined to administrative control and appointment/removal of Mutawallis, and do not extend to determining spiritual succession. It reiterated that exclusion of civil court jurisdiction cannot be lightly inferred under Section 9 CPC and that such jurisdiction remains intact unless expressly or clearly barred. The Court also noted that the dispute had already been adjudicated by civil courts over decades, with concurrent findings on facts, and that belated invocation of jurisdictional objection was unwarranted.

Decision: The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the High Court judgment which had held civil court jurisdiction to be barred, restored the concurrent findings of the Trial Court and First Appellate Court declaring the appellant as Sajjadanashin, and disposed of all pending applications with consequential reliefs, while maintaining continuity of administration of the Dargah.