Payment of court fees mandatory for cases filed before Gujarat Waqf Tribunal: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court on Wednesday ruled that payment of court fees is mandatory for filing cases related to Waqf properties before the Gujarat State Waqf Tribunal [Sunni Muslim Idgah Masjid Trust v Hardik Sitaram Patel & Anr].

It was argued that levy of court fees under the provisions of Gujarat Court Fees Act, 2004 is not attracted since Section 83(3) of the Waqf Act uses the expression “application” and not “suit” for proceedings seeking determination of disputes related to a Waqf.

However, Justice JC Doshi rejected the contention.

The Court noted that an application under Section 83(3) of the Waqf Act partakes the character of adversarial litigation in which the competing rights of the landlord and the tenant are adjudicated, eviction of the tenant is sought, and the rights and obligations of the lessor and lessee fall for judicial determination.

Thereafter, proceedings are conducted in a manner akin to a civil suit and thus such proceedings are essentially in the nature of a suit even if styled as an “application”, the Court ruled.

“Tribunal is expressly deemed to be a Civil Court, being vested with all the powers of a Civil Court under the CPC for the purpose of trying a suit or executing a decree or order. In such a statutory framework, the mere nomenclature of the initiating pleading as an “application” cannot be distinguished from a “plaint” as “suit”, when in substance and effect it seeks determination of the rights and obligations of the parties,” it added.

Therefore, the Court concluded that there is no blanket exemption from payment of court fees in respect of an application filed under Section 83 of the Waqf Act in the State of Gujarat.

“In the absence of any statutory exemption, such proceedings certainly attract the levy of court fees,” the Court said.

The Court also ruled that provisions of Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) are applicable to the Waqf Tribunal proceedings and thus, a suit can be rejected for issues like undervaluation or non-payment of court fees.

“In view of the explicit statutory mandate that the Waqf Tribunal is deemed to be a Civil Court and is vested with the same powers as are exercisable by a Civil Court under the CPC while trying a suit or executing a decree or order, there exists no justification whatsoever to exclude the applicability of Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC,” the judge said.

The Court passed the judgment on a batch of 133 petitions related to the cases seeking recovery of possession of Waqf properties from the tenants or alleged encroachers. 

The Waqf Tribunal had rejected the applications after finding that the Waqf institutions or the applicants had neither correctly valued their cases nor affixed the requisite court fees commensurate with such valuation.

Despite an opportunity, the applicants failed to rectify the valuation of the suits and pay the deficit court fees, leading to rejection of their applications.

On Wednesday, the Court refused to interfere with the rejection of the suits. It noted that the first order directing correction of the valuation of the suit for the purposes of court fee and jurisdiction, was not challenged before any higher forum until the plaint came to be rejected.

The Court answered in negative the question of whether in the absence of a valid and timely challenge to the first order, the second order rejecting the plaint can be assailed on the ground of non-payment of sufficient court fees.

“This Court does not discern any palpable illegality, jurisdictional infirmity, or error of law in the impugned orders warranting interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction,” it held.

Advocate MTM Hakim argued for the petitioners.

Government Pleader Gursharan Virk appeared for the State.

Advocate Manish Shah represented Gujarat State Waqf Board. 

[Read Judgment]