No exemption to Muslim Waqf institutions from paying court fees, says Gujarat HC, junks pleas

Ahmedabad, Dec 17 (PTI) In a significant judgment, the Gujarat High Court on Wednesday rejected nearly 150 petitions from Muslim Waqf institutions seeking exemption from payment of fees to the State Waqf Tribunal to access a court of law.

Justice JC Doshi dismissed the petitions, many of which involved contested rent claims, possession disputes, and rights of occupancy over key properties across the state.

Waqf trusts such as Sunni Muslim Idgah Masjid Trust, the Vadodara Saher Masjid Sabha Trust, and the Sarkhej Roza Committee in Ahmedabad, had challenged orders of the Gujarat State Waqf Tribunal requiring payment of court fees before their disputes could be heard.

The court observed that they had sought reliefs before the tribunal which were adversarial in character wherein rights and obligations of contesting parties are required to be judicially determined.

"An application instituted under section 83 of the Waqf Act, forming part of the judicial proceedings contemplated under Chapter VIII thereof, therefore, partakes the character of a plaint or suit and necessarily attracts the provisions of the Gujarat Court Fees Act, 2004," it said.

The HC noted the first order passed by the Waqf Tribunal, 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 question, therefore, arises 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, it stated.

"In view of foregoing reasons, 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," the HC noted, dismissing the pleas.

The advocate for the Waqf institutions argued that the Waqf Act is silent with regard to payment of court fees. Therefore, no court fee is required to be paid on an application instituted under the Act.

"However, the applicability of Section 1(5) of the Gujarat Court Fees Act, 2004, clearly indicates that the said enactment governs the fees leviable in courts and public offices within the State, in absence of any special law governing issue of levy of court fees," the court observed.

It said that section 4 of the Gujarat Court Fees Act expressly interdicts the filing, exhibiting, or recording of any document in any court of justice, or its receipt or furnishing by any public office, unless the fee has been duly paid.

Further, the tribunal is deemed to be a civil court, being vested with all powers of a civil court for the purpose of trying a suit or executing a decree or order, the HC pointed out.

"In such a statutory framework, the mere nomenclature of the initiating pleading as an application cannot be distinguished from a complaint or suit, when in substance and effect it seeks determination of the rights and obligations of parties. Ergo, no inflexible or uniform rule can be laid down to the effect that court fees are wholly inapplicable to proceedings under Section 83 of the Waqf Act," it said.

The high court said there is no blanket exemption from payment of court fees in respect of every application filed under section 83 of the Waqf Act, 1995, in Gujarat.

The group of institutions had instituted Waqf suits before the Tribunal under Section 83 of the 1995 Act, seeking recovery of possession of Waqf properties from the tenants and/or alleged encroachers, along with ancillary reliefs including profits.

The Tribunal, upon a preliminary scrutiny of the pleadings, found that the plaintiff - Waqf institutions -- had neither correctly valued the suits nor affixed the requisite court fees commensurate with such valuation.

Consequently, in 2024, the Tribunal passed orders directing the respective Waqf plaintiffs to rectify the valuation of the suits and to pay the deficit court fees within the stipulated time, with a clear caveat that failure to do so will invite rejection of the plaint.

The Waqf plaintiffs failed to do so by either correcting the valuation or by depositing the requisite court fees. Resultantly, the Waqf Tribunal rejected the plaints by separate orders passed on respective dates.

During the pendency of the suits, a group of petitioners filed an application seeking striking off certain pleadings and exclusion of certain reliefs from the purview of valuation and court fees.

The Tribunal directed another group of petitioners to deposit the entire litigation expenses, including advocate fees, into the Waqf's bank account, as also to refund emoluments received by them in their capacity as officers of the Gujarat State Waqf Board.

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgments and orders passed by the Waqf Tribunal, they approached the High Court. PTI KA PD RSY