Service Inam Land for Religious Purpose Is Wakf Property and Cannot Be Alienated: Supreme Court Restores Tribunal Findings
Case Name: A.P. State Wakf Board v. Janaki Busappa & Ors.
Citation: 2026 INSC 413
Date of Judgment/Order: April 24, 2026
Bench: Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Augustine George Masih
Held: The Supreme Court held that land granted as service inam for religious purposes partakes the character of Wakf property and cannot be validly alienated or transferred to confer title upon private parties. It further held that a plaintiff seeking declaration of title must succeed on the strength of their own case, and where foundational documents themselves indicate the religious character of the land, the claim of private ownership is untenable in law.
Summary: The dispute concerned ownership and possession of land claimed by private individuals on the basis of a partition deed of 1945 and subsequent sale deeds, while the Wakf Board asserted that the land formed part of Wakf property attached to a mosque as service inam land. The Wakf Tribunal dismissed the suit for declaration and injunction, holding that the plaintiffs failed to prove title, but the High Court reversed the findings and decreed the suit. Before the Supreme Court, the Court examined the recitals of the partition deed, admissions of the plaintiffs, and supporting material including survey reports and Gazette notifications. It found that the property was clearly described as service inam granted for religious purposes, thereby acquiring the character of Wakf property. The Court held that such property is inalienable and that the plaintiffs’ predecessors could not have transferred valid title. It further held that the High Court erred in reappreciating evidence in revision and in shifting the burden of proof upon the Wakf Board, contrary to settled principles under the Evidence Act. The Court also clarified that mere possession without lawful title cannot justify grant of declaration or injunction.
Decision: The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court’s judgment, restored the Wakf Tribunal’s dismissal of the suit, and held that the suit property is Wakf land, with no order as to costs and all pending applications disposed of.