Res Judicata under Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Meaning & Origin The term Res Judicata comes from Latin, where “Res” means thing or matter and “Judicata” means adjudged or decided. In simple terms, it is a legal doctrine that prevents the re-litigation of a matter already decided by a competent court. This doctrine is based on three maxims: 1. Nemo debet bis vexari pro una et eadem causa – No person should be vexed twice for the same cause. 2. Interest republicae ut sit finis litium – It is in the interest of the State that litigation must come to an end. 3. Res judicata pro veritate occipitur – A judicial decision must be accepted as correct. Statutory Provision Section 11 CPC states: “No Court shall try any suit or issue in which the matter directly and substantially in issue has been directly and substantially in issue in a former suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim, litigating under the same title, in a Court competent to try such subsequent suit or the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised, and has been heard and finally decided by such Court.” The section contains eight explanations clarifying terms like “former suit”, “competence of court”, “constructive res judicata”, and application in execution proceedings. • Conditions for Application For res judicata to apply, the following must be satisfied: 1. The matter must be directly and substantially in issue in both suits. 2. The prior suit must be between the same parties or their legal representatives. 3. The parties must have litigated under the same title. 4. The earlier court must have been competent to try the later suit. 5. The matter must have been heard and finally decided. ✓ Matter in Issue Types of Issues • Issue of Fact – Always operates as res judicata. • Issue of Law – Only when connected with facts. • Mixed Issue of Fact & Law – Also operates as res judicata. The Supreme Court in Mathura Prasad v. Dossibai held that a decision on a point of law operates as res judicata if it is not independent of the facts of the case. • Classification 1. Directly and Substantially in Issue Essential for the decision of the case. Example: Dispute over ownership or tenancy in an eviction case. 2. Collaterally or Incidentally in Issue Side issues arising in the case; findings here do not bar re-litigation. √ Constructive Res Judicata (Explanation IV to Section 11 CPC) If a party could and should have raised a ground in a previous suit but did not, the law will treat it as if it had been raised and decided. Test: • Is the present issue connected to the earlier suit? • Could and should it have been raised earlier? • Was it known or discoverable with due diligence? Example: State of U.P. v. Nawab Hussain – Second suit on a new ground barred because it could have been raised earlier. ∆ Parties Covered • Same Parties – Even if roles are reversed (plaintiff ↔ defendant). • Co-defendants & Co-plaintiffs – If there was a necessary conflict decided in the earlier suit. • Parties Claiming Under Same Title – Through sale, gift, succession, will, lease, etc. • Representative Suits – Under Explanation VI, bona fide litigation on public/common rights binds all interested parties. • Competency of Court The competence of the former court is judged as on the date of the first suit. It can be: • Exclusive jurisdiction courts (e.g., Revenue Court). • Limited jurisdiction courts (decision still binding). • Concurrent jurisdiction courts. ✓ Final Decision Requirement Res judicata applies only if the earlier decision was on merits, including: • Ex parte decrees (if on merits). • Decrees on awards. ✓ No res judicata if dismissed for technical reasons like: • Lack of jurisdiction • Non-joinder of parties • Improper valuation • Premature suit Special Points • Withdrawal of suit – No bar. • Compromise decree – Not res judicata, but estoppel may apply. • Appeal pending – Decision loses finality; becomes res sub judice. • Not applicable to Habeas Corpus petitions. • Res Judicata vs Estoppel Res Judicata:-Based on court’s decision Estoppel:-Based on party’s conduct Res Judicata:-Public policy – end litigation Estoppel:-Equity – prevent inconsistent statements Res Judicata:-Bars jurisdiction Estoppel:-Rule of evidence Res Judicata:-Binds both parties Estoppel:-Binds only the party making earlier representation ∆ Exceptions 1. Waiver of plea. 2. Interlocutory orders. 3. Dismissal of SLP without reasons. 4. Different cause of action. 5. Judgment by fraud or collusion. 6. Court lacking jurisdiction. 7. Change in law creating new rights. ✓ Leading Cases • Daryao v. State of U.P. – Writ under Article 32 barred after dismissal under Article 226. • State of U.P. v. Nawab Hussain – New ground in later suit barred. • Devilal Modi v. STO – Second writ petition on new grounds barred. • Sulochana Amma v. Narayanan Nair – Even limited jurisdiction courts’ decisions can bind. Conclusion The doctrine of res judicata is a cornerstone of civil justice. It ensures finality of litigation, prevents multiplicity of suits, and protects the authority of judicial decisions. However, its application must balance justice and fairness, avoiding injustice under the guise of finality. ✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324 At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need: •Subject-wise expert classes •Mock test series •Legal current affairs •Personalized mentorship for interview preparation “Your law degree is your foundation, but your preparation is what will build your success.” Join Our New Batch Now! Prepare smart. Prepare with Theory of Abrogation. Contact Us: B-109, Commercial Complex Dr. Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi-09 +91 9971399324 | +91 8840961324 [email protected]
Category: Law
Res Sub Judice: Stay of Suit under section 10 cpc
Res Sub Judice: Stay of Suit under Section 10 CPC Introduction Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) embodies the doctrine of Res Sub Judice, which literally means “a matter under judicial consideration”. The provision is aimed at preventing simultaneous trials of two suits in different courts when the matter in issue is the same, thereby avoiding conflicting decisions and multiplicity of proceedings. Statutory Provision Section 10 reads as follows: “No court shall proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is also directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title where such suit is pending in the same or any other court in India having jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed, or in any court beyond the limits of India established or constituted by the Central Government and having like jurisdiction, or before the Supreme Court.” Explanation: The pendency of a suit in a foreign court does not preclude Indian courts from trying a suit founded on the same cause of action. Object of Section 10 The primary purpose of Section 10 is: • To avoid multiplicity of proceedings. • To prevent two courts of concurrent jurisdiction from trying the same matter at the same time. • To avoid the risk of conflicting decisions. Conditions for Applicability For Section 10 to apply, the following conditions must be satisfied: 1. There must be two suits – one previously instituted and another subsequently instituted. 2. The matter in issue in the subsequent suit must be directly and substantially in issue in the previous suit. 3. Both suits must be between the same parties or their representatives. 4. The parties must be litigating under the same title in both suits. 5. The previously instituted suit must be pending in a court having jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed in the subsequent suit. 6. Section 10 applies only to suits (including appeals) and not to applications or complaints. ✓ Meaning of “Matter in Issue” The expression “matter in issue” means the entire matter in controversy in the suit, not just some issues. Mere overlapping of issues is insufficient. Example: Recovery of rent for one period and rent for a later period with ejectment would not be considered the same matter in issue. Illustrations 1. Claim for Rent: A sues B for rent. B denies rent is due. The claim for rent is directly and substantially in issue. 2. Title & Rent: A sues B for declaration of title and for rent of the same land. Both title and rent are directly and substantially in issue. 3. Trademark Dispute: If A company sues B company for infringement and B files a similar suit against A in another court, the latter must be stayed. Scope of Section 10 • Bar on Trial, Not Institution: Section 10 does not prohibit filing of a subsequent suit; it only bars its trial until the earlier suit is decided. • Mandatory Nature: The provision is mandatory and applies whenever conditions are met. • Inherent Powers: If conditions are not strictly met, courts can use inherent powers under Section 151 CPC to stay proceedings in the interest of justice. Effect of Contravention A decree passed in contravention of Section 10 is not void; it remains valid unless set aside. The rule can also be waived by parties if they consent to proceed with the subsequent suit. Interim Orders A stay of the suit does not prevent the court from passing interim orders such as injunctions, appointment of receiver, attachment before judgment, etc. Test for Applicability The key test is whether the decision in the earlier suit would operate as res judicata in the later suit. If yes, the later suit must be stayed. Consolidation of Suits To avoid conflicting judgments, courts may consolidate suits between the same parties involving substantially the same issues. ∆ Difference between Res Judicata and Res Sub Judice 1. Res Judicata: Applies to matters already adjudicated (final decision). 2. Res Sub Judice: Applies to matters pending decision in a previously instituted suit. Conclusion Section 10 CPC is a procedural safeguard ensuring judicial discipline by avoiding parallel trials over the same dispute. While it bars the trial of a subsequent suit, it leaves room for necessary interim relief and consolidation, ultimately aiming to protect the integrity and efficiency of the judicial process. ✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324 At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need: •Subject-wise expert classes •Mock test series •Legal current affairs •Personalized mentorship for interview preparation “Your law degree is your foundation, but your preparation is what will build your success.” Join Our New Batch Now! Prepare smart. Prepare with Theory of Abrogation. Contact Us: B-109, Commercial Complex Dr. Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi-09 +91 9971399324 | +91 8840961324 [email protected]
Juristic Personality 1. Concept of Legal Personality In every legal system, there must be entities that can hold rights and bear duties. These entities are called legal persons. A legal person may be: • A natural person (human being) – exists by nature, recognized by law. • A juristic person (artificial person) – created by law, such as companies, states, and institutions. Definition (Salmond): A person is any being whom the law regards as capable of rights and duties. Statutory Definition: • Section 11, IPC and Section 2(26), BNS – “Person” includes companies, associations, and bodies of persons, whether incorporated or not. 2. Natural vs Juristic Persons • Natural Persons: Born with personality; e.g., citizens, residents. • Juristic Persons: Granted personality by legal recognition; e.g., corporations, municipal bodies, universities, religious institutions. 3. Types of Juristic Persons A. Corporations:-A corporation is an artificial legal person with separate identity from its members. (i) Corporation Sole • A single office that continues despite change of holder. • Examples: President of India, Governor of a State, CAG. • Salmond calls it “two persons in one” — the human and the permanent office. (ii) Corporation Aggregate • A group of persons forming one legal entity. • Created by charter, by statute, or by registration. • Examples: RBI, Infosys Ltd, BMC. B. Corporate Personality • Case: Salomon v. Salomon (1897) – Established that a company is a separate legal entity. • Rights: Own property, sue and be sued, enter into contracts. • Acts through agents/directors. C. Religious Institutions as Juristic Persons • Pramatha Nath Mullick v. Pradyumna Kumar Mullick (1925) – Hindu idols recognized as legal persons capable of owning property and suing. D. The State • Under Article 300, Constitution of India – Union and State governments can sue and be sued in their own names. 4. Entities Without Separate Legal Personality • Unincorporated Associations – Social clubs, trade associations; cannot sue in own name. • Partnership Firms – Not distinct legal persons, but can sue/be sued if registered. • Registered Trade Unions – Recognized by statute; have limited rights. 5. Special Situations A. Double Capacity One human can act in multiple legal roles (e.g., individual & trustee) but still has one legal personality. B. Legal Status of a Dead Person • Legal personality ends with death. • Certain rights remain protected: dignity of burial, protection from defamation, enforcement of will. C. Legal Status of an Unborn Child • Can hold certain rights subject to birth. • Example: Section 13, Transfer of Property Act – property can be transferred for benefit of unborn. 6. Theories of Corporate Personality 1. Fiction Theory – Corporation is an artificial creation of law (Savigny). 2. Concession Theory – Personality exists because the state allows (Dicey, Salmond). 3. Realist Theory – Corporation is a real social group (Gierke, Maitland). 4. Bracket Theory – Corporate name is just a symbolic bracket for members (Ihering). 5. Purpose Theory – Personality exists only to fulfill specific purposes (Brinz). 6. Hohfeld’s Theory – Only humans truly have rights; corporation is a legal method. 7. Doctrine of Lifting the Corporate Veil General Rule: Company is separate from members (Salomon). Exception: Courts may “lift the veil” to find real persons controlling the company. When Applied: • Fraud or improper conduct (Gilford Motor Co. v. Horne, 1933) • Evasion of obligations (Jones v. Lipman, 1962) • Public interest or prevention of crime (DDA v. Skipper Construction, 1996) 8. Corporate Liability • Civil Liability – For breach of contract, negligence, etc. • Criminal Liability – For offences where fine is applicable; directors/officers may also be liable. • Cases: Satyam Scandal (2009), Bhopal Gas Tragedy (1984). Conclusion The concept of juristic personality is one of the cornerstones of modern law. By granting legal recognition to artificial entities like corporations, institutions, and even religious idols, the legal system allows them to own property, enter into contracts, and be held liable — just like natural persons. This concept facilitates commerce, governance, and social organization. However, the law also ensures accountability by doctrines like lifting the corporate veil, ensuring that legal personality is not misused as a shield for fraud or injustice. ✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324 At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need: •Subject-wise expert classes •Mock test series •Legal current affairs •Personalized mentorship for interview preparation “Your law degree is your foundation, but your preparation is what will build your success.” Join Our New Batch Now! Prepare smart. Prepare with Theory of Abrogation. Contact Us: B-109, Commercial Complex Dr. Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi-09 +91 9971399324 | +91 8840961324 [email protected]
Ownership and Possession in Jurisprudence – Meaning, Essentials, Types, and Case Laws Ownership and possession are two core concepts in jurisprudence and property law. While often related, ownership is the ultimate legal right over a thing, whereas possession refers to physical control or holding of that thing. This distinction is vital for law students, judiciary exam aspirants, and legal professionals because courts often decide property disputes based on these concepts. Ownership – Meaning and Significance Ownership means having legal rights over a property or object. It is not just physical control; it covers a bundle of rights, such as: • Claiming possession • Using and enjoying • Transferring or disposing • Protecting against interference by others Salmond’s view: Ownership is a legal relationship between a person and a thing, which includes rights in rem (enforceable against the whole world). Austin’s view: Ownership is a right against everyone, not limited by time, usage, or method of transfer. Essentials of Ownership 1. Right of Possession • Even if the owner is not in actual possession, the law recognizes their right to claim it. Example: If M’s watch is stolen, M remains the owner and can recover it. 2. Right to Use and Enjoy • Owner may: • Manage the property • Use it personally • Earn income from it These are liberties, not always strict legal rights. 3. Right to Consume, Destroy, or Transfer (Alienate) • Owner can: • Eat, use up, or destroy the thing • Sell, gift, or mortgage it (Subject to legal restrictions – e.g., land sale to foreigners may be restricted.) 4. Indeterminate Duration • Ownership lasts until voluntarily transferred or abandoned. • After death, it passes to heirs. 5. Residuary Character • Even after granting rights to others (e.g., tenancy), the remaining rights stay with the owner. Ownership vs. Possession • Ownership = Legal title • Possession = Actual holding or control Example: A landlord owns a house but the tenant possesses it. A thief possesses a watch, but ownership remains with the lawful owner. Encumbrances on Ownership An encumbrance is a limitation or burden on ownership rights, where another person has some right over the property. Common examples: • Lease – Tenant’s right to occupy • Servitude – Right of way over land • Mortgage/Security – Creditor’s interest in property What Can Be Owned? Ownership is not limited to physical property. It can include: • Physical assets – land, buildings, vehicles • Rights – debt recovery, patent rights • Investments – stocks, bonds Salmond: Law protects rights, not objects directly — so ownership is always of a right. How Ownership is Acquired According to Salmond, ownership can be acquired: 1. By Law – Without any action (e.g., inheritance) 2. By Act/Event – Original acquisition (first-time possession) or derivative acquisition (purchase, gift) Types of Ownership 1. Corporeal & Incorporeal – Physical things vs. rights 2. Trust & Beneficial Ownership – Trustee holds legal title; beneficiary enjoys benefits 3. Legal & Equitable – Indian law treats both equally 4. Sole & Co-ownership – Single owner vs. joint owners 5. Vested & Contingent – Absolute vs. conditional ownership Possession – Meaning and Legal Recognition Possession means having physical control over a thing with the intention to hold it. Before law existed, possession was a natural fact; later, law started protecting it for maintaining peace and order. Salmond: Possession is actual holding (possession in fact) + intention (animus possidendi). Essentials of Possession 1. Corpus Possessionis (Physical Control) • Ability to use and exclude others • Confidence that interference will not occur 2. Animus Possidendi (Intention to Possess) • Acting as if the property is one’s own • Not necessarily believing you are the legal owner • Savigny: True possession requires acting like an owner Kinds of Possession 1. Corporeal & Incorporeal – Tangible items vs. rights 2. Immediate & Mediate – Direct control vs. control through another 3. Adverse Possession – Long, open, and hostile possession without permission can lead to ownership 4. Possession in Fact & in Law – Actual control vs. legal right to control Modes of Acquiring Possession • Taking – With or without consent of the possessor • Delivery – Actual or constructive (surrender, transfer of legal control) Legal Importance of Possession • Evidence of Ownership – Presumed owner unless proven otherwise • Adverse Possession – Can ripen into ownership • Protection under Law – Section 6, Specific Relief Act protects possession from unlawful eviction • Transfer of Ownership – Often through possession Important Case Laws 1. Merry v. Green (1843) – No possession without intention 2. Armory v. Delamirie (1722) – Finder has rights against all except true owner 3. South Staffordshire Water Co. v. Sharman (1896) – Possession of land includes objects in it 4. Hannah v. Peel (1945) – Finder’s rights can prevail over absentee owner 5. Hibbert v. McKiernan (1948) – Trespasser cannot claim possession Possessory Remedies Possession is protected by: • Criminal law – Prevents unlawful dispossession • Tort law – Actions for wrongful interference • Property law – Section 6, Specific Relief Act: Even unlawful possession cannot be disturbed without due process Conclusion Ownership and possession, though closely related, are not the same. Ownership gives complete legal rights, while possession is physical control with intention. Law protects both to maintain peace, order, and property security. ✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324 At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need: •Subject-wise expert classes •Mock test series •Legal current affairs •Personalized mentorship for interview preparation “Your law degree is your foundation, but your preparation is what will build your success.” Join Our New Batch Now! Prepare smart. Prepare with Theory of Abrogation. Contact Us: B-109, Commercial Complex Dr. Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi-09 +91 9971399324 | +91 8840961324 [email protected]
Legal Rights and Duties In Jurisprudence: State Recognition, Protection & Exceptions Understanding rights and duties is central to the study of jurisprudence. Legal rights are not merely abstract ideas but legally enforceable claims, protected and recognized by the State. Duties are the counterpart of rights, and together they form the foundation of the legal system. This article explores the nature, theories, recognition, protection, and exceptions concerning legal rights and duties. 🔹 Meaning of Legal Right Salmond defines a legal right as: “An interest recognized and protected by the law, the violation of which would be a legal wrong, and the respect of which is a legal duty.” A legal right thus includes: • An interest • Recognition by law • Protection by law • A duty imposed on others Essence of a Right: If X owes ₹100 to Y, and the law enforces this debt, Y has a legal right. The right isn’t in the money but in the legal power to demand payment. X, in turn, has a legal duty to pay. 🔹 Theories of Legal Rights 1. Will Theory • Supported by: Austin, Holland, Kant, Hegel • View: Rights arise from an individual’s will or autonomy. • Criticism: Fails to include entities like infants or mentally ill, who can’t express will yet have rights. 2. Interest Theory • Propounded by: Ihering, Salmond • View: Law protects socially valuable interests. • Advantage: Covers a wider range of right-holders including corporations, infants, etc. 🔹 State Recognition of Rights A claim or interest becomes a legal right only when recognized by the State. Without legal recognition, it remains a moral or social expectation. Gray: “Only those interests which the law recognizes become rights.” Even moral rights or natural rights become legal only after formal recognition. 🔹 State Protection of Rights (Controversial) Recognition is not enough — a right must also be protected and enforced by the legal system. • Salmond & Ihering: A right requires enforceability through courts. • Austin: Law must impose a duty through the sovereign. • Gray: Recognition without protection is incomplete. For example, if a person has a right to receive rent, the court must provide a remedy (e.g., recovery suit) when that right is violated. 🔹 Exceptions: No Absolute Protection Despite state recognition, not all rights are perfectly protected or enforceable. These are known as imperfect rights or rights without remedy. 1. Imperfect Rights Recognized by law but not enforceable due to procedural defects. Examples: • Time-barred debts under Limitation Act • Claims against foreign sovereigns • Rights with insufficient legal evidence This is an exception to the famous maxim: Ubi jus ibi remedium – “Where there is a right, there is a remedy” 2. Rights with Remedies but No Enforcement Some rights are not enforced by courts but are acknowledged morally or politically, e.g. tortious claims or certain constitutional directives. Example: Damages for defamation or false imprisonment may be granted, but the act itself may not be immediately stopped. 3. No Enforcement Mechanism: International Law Some international human rights are recognized but lack enforcement. Examples: • Rights under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) • International Court of Justice decisions — only binding with state consent 🔹 Types of Legal Rights Based on Object: 1. Over Material Things – e.g., car, land, house 2. Over Person – e.g., protection from assault 3. Over Reputation – e.g., protection from defamation 4. Intangible Property – e.g., copyrights, patents 5. Domestic Relations – e.g., marital or parental rights Perfect vs. Imperfect Rights: • Perfect Right – Enforceable by courts • Imperfect Right – Recognized but not enforceable 🔹 Hohfeld’s Analysis of Legal Rights Term Correlative Opposite Right Duty No-Right Liberty No-Duty Duty Power Liability Disability Immunity Disability Liability Examples: • Right: Landlord has right → Tenant has duty to pay rent • Liberty: Person may walk in public park → No one has right to stop • Power: Judge can sentence → Accused has liability • Immunity: President is immune from criminal prosecution (Art. 361) 🔹 Special Classifications Basis Types Subject of Right Proprietary vs. Personal. Enforcement Ordinary vs. Fundamental Source of Recognition Legal vs. Equitable (under English Law) Scope Right…
Sources of Law In jurisprudence– An Analytical Overview Definition of Sources of Law Sources of law are origins or roots from where laws derive their authority. They explain how laws are formed and what gives them legal power. Salmond’s Classification of Sources of Law Salmond divides the sources into two major types: 1. Material Sources These are the content or material from which laws are developed. A. Legal Sources (Authoritative) These are legally recognized and binding in nature. • Custom – Forms Customary Law • Precedent – Leads to Case Law • Legislation – Gives rise to Statutory Law • Agreement – Forms Conventional Law B. Historical Sources (Non-authoritative) These influence the law but are not binding: • Writings of jurists • Foreign judgments • Ancient customs 2. Formal Sources These provide legal force to rules when they are recognized by courts or included in statute books. • A rule becomes formal when it gains authority through legislation or judicial recognition. Kinds of Legal Sources (According to Salmond) 1. Custom 2. Precedent 3. Legislation 4. Agreement (for Conventional Law) • Custom as a Source of Law Definition by Salmond “Custom is to society what law is to the state.” ✓ Importance of Custom • Foundation of early law • Enhances acceptability of laws ✓ Decline of Custom • Modern legal systems rely more on legislation and precedent. Types of Custom 1. Legal Custom (Binding without agreement) • General Legal Custom: Applies nationwide • Local Legal Custom: Applies in a specific region or group 2. Conventional Custom (Based on agreement) • Binding only if parties agree • Common in trade and commercial practices Tests for Valid Custom 1. Antiquity – Must exist since time immemorial (Blackstone: Must be older than memory) 2. Continuity – Must be practiced without legal break 3. Peaceful & Open Use – Must not be secretive or forced 4. As of Right – Claimed as a right, not a privilege 5. Reasonableness – Must not be unjust or against public policy • Lady Wilson v. Willes (1806): Unreasonable custom rejected 6. Opinio Necessitatis – Must be followed with a sense of obligation 7. Conformity with Statutory Law – Cannot conflict with legislation • Allen: Even ancient custom cannot override statute 8. Consistency with Other Customs – Must not conflict with existing customs 9. Definite Locality or Group – Must be specific and not vague Theories on Customary Law 1. Historical School (Savigny, Carter) • Custom = true law • Courts/legislatures only recognize what already exists 2. Austin’s View • Custom becomes law only when recognized by the state 3. Salmond & Holland • Custom is a material legal source, accepted if it meets legal tests Precedent as a Source of Law Definition A precedent is a judicial decision that sets a legal principle. It must be followed in future cases by the same or lower courts. ✓ Importance • Ensures consistency and predictability • Especially important when no statute exists Advantages of Precedent 1. Certainty in Law 2. Natural Growth of Law 3. Flexibility and Adaptability Disadvantages 1. Rigidity 2. Over-technical approach 3. Slow law reform • Bentham: “It is dog’s law” Hierarchy of Precedents • Lower courts follow higher courts • Equal benches follow for consistency • High Courts must follow Supreme Court rulings • Smaller benches are bound by larger benches Precedents in India 1. Article 141 of the Constitution “The law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all courts within the territory of India.” 2. High Court Rules • Single Judge follows other Single Judge • Division Bench decisions binding on equal strength benches 3. Persuasive Value • High Court decisions not binding on others, but influential Doctrine of Stare Decisis “To stand by what has been decided.” • Ensures judicial discipline • Courts rely on clear hierarchy and recorded judgments Theories of Judicial Law-Making 1. Declaratory Theory (Blackstone) • Judges declare existing law • Criticized by Bentham & Salmond 2. Judges as Lawmakers • Judges create law when interpreting new issues • Lord Denning, Gray, Dicey: Judges shape law daily Types of Precedents 1. Authoritative – Binding (e.g., SC decisions) 2. Persuasive – Not binding (foreign or other High Courts) 3. Declaratory – Restate existing law 4. Original – Create new legal principle Ratio Decidendi & Obiter Dicta • Ratio Decidendi = Legal reasoning behind the decision → Binding • Obiter Dicta = Extra remarks → Not binding but persuasive When Precedents Are Not Binding 1. Overruled by higher court 2. Ignorance of law 3. Conflicts with earlier higher court rulings 4. Contradictory decisions of same-level courts 5. Sub Silentio – Decided without proper legal discussion Legislation as a Source of Law Definition by Salmond Every formal expression of legislative will is legislation. Types 1. Supreme Legislation – Parliament (cannot be overruled) 2. Subordinate Legislation – Created under authority of supreme legislation • Executive, Judicial, Municipal, Autonomous Direct vs. Indirect Legislation • Direct – Acts passed by Parliament (e.g., BNS 2023) • Indirect – Judicial interpretations (e.g., Article 21 = Right to Privacy) Advantages of Legislation 1. Clear & Declared 2. Abrogative Power – Can repeal old laws 3. Efficient Division – Legislature makes, courts apply 4. Future-ready – Addresses new problems (e.g., AI, Cybercrime) • Salmond: “Legislation is like coin; custom is gold in the mine.” Delegated Legislation – A Double-Edged Sword Definition When Parliament delegates power to the executive to make rules. Examples • Environment Protection Act rules made by Government Need for Delegation • Technical details • Faster rule-making • Shared responsibility Criticism Jurist. View Keeton “Like ghostly Banquo’s children” – too many rules Hewart “New despotism” – dangerous executive power Sankey …
Major Schools of Jurisprudence: Explained with Key Thinkers and Concepts Jurisprudence is the theoretical study of law, helping us understand its purpose, nature, and functioning in society. Several schools of jurisprudence have emerged over time, each with a different approach to how law should be interpreted. Here’s an overview of six major schools of jurisprudence with important thinkers and principles. 1. Analytical School (Legal Positivism) Also known as Imperative School, Positive Law School, English School, or Austinian School, this school focuses on the logical structure and analysis of law, rather than its moral content. 🔹 Key Idea: Law = Command of the sovereign backed by sanction. Jeremy Bentham, the founder of utilitarianism, believed that the purpose of law is to ensure the greatest happiness for the greatest number. He rejected natural rights and disliked judge-made law, advocating for codification. His famous book: The Limits of Jurisprudence Defined. John Austin, often regarded as the father of English jurisprudence, emphasized that only laws made by the sovereign and backed by sanctions are “laws properly so called”. His work Province of Jurisprudence Determined (1832) divided laws into: • Laws properly so called: Commands from a sovereign (e.g., IPC). • Laws improperly so called: Customs, moral rules, scientific laws. H.L.A. Hart refined Austin’s theory with his book The Concept of Law. He introduced: • Primary rules: Substantive obligations (e.g., do not steal). • Secondary rules: Rules about making and interpreting laws (e.g., Constitution). Hans Kelsen, through his Pure Theory of Law, emphasized that law is a hierarchy of norms, and its ultimate source is a Grundnorm (Basic Norm), like “The Constitution must be obeyed”. 🔻 Criticism of Analytical School: 1. Ignored customs and moral foundations. 2. Overemphasis on command and sanction. 3. Dismissed international law. 4. Neglected the role of judiciary and permissive laws. 2. Historical School This school believes law is not created but evolves with society through customs, traditions, and national spirit (Volksgeist). Friedrich Karl von Savigny, the father of this school, argued that law grows organically from the people’s beliefs, not from rulers. Henry Maine, in his book Ancient Law, observed the evolution of law from status to contract. Puchta and Hugo further emphasized that law is shaped by collective consciousness. Example: The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 formalized customs that already existed. 3. Sociological School This school sees law as a tool for social engineering, focusing on how law affects people’s lives and promotes justice, equality, and social welfare. Roscoe Pound, the most influential figure, said: “Law is social engineering”—it should fix societal problems like an engineer repairs machinery. Other notable thinkers: • Eugen Ehrlich: Introduced the concept of “Living Law”, found in people’s actual behavior. • Leon Duguit: Emphasized social solidarity over state sovereignty. • Ihering: Believed law exists to protect social interests, not just individual rights. Example: Child Labour Laws protect vulnerable children, reflecting law’s role in solving social issues. 4. Realist School This school asserts that law is what the courts do, not just what is written in statutes. It focuses on judicial behavior, real-life application of laws, and how judges’ personal views and facts influence decisions. Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. said: “The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience.” Jerome Frank introduced “Fact Skepticism”, saying that judges are influenced by their backgrounds. Karl Llewellyn stressed the difference between “law in books” and “law in action”. Example: Different judgments for the same crime reveal how judicial discretion shapes the law. 5. Philosophical (Natural Law) School This school holds that law must be rooted in morality, ethics, and justice. It connects law with what is right, not just what is written. 🔹 Key Idea: Law = Morality + Justice Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle laid early foundations. Plato said that justice is the highest aim of the state. St. Thomas Aquinas argued that law must reflect God’s will and moral values. Immanuel Kant emphasized law should protect freedom and human dignity, while Rudolf Stammler believed justice is the purpose behind all laws. Example: Laws against slavery or racial discrimination reflect moral truth, even if such practices were once legal. • Landmark judgements 1. Analytical School (Legal Positivism) This school focuses on law as it is (not what it ought to be), emphasizing sovereign authority and codified law. ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976) — Habeas Corpus Case • Facts: During Emergency, right to life under Article 21 was suspended. • Relevance: The majority judgment reflected legal positivism, stating that if law permits detention, courts cannot interfere, even if it seems unjust. • Criticism: Later overruled in Puttaswamy case; criticized for ignoring natural rights. State of Andhra Pradesh v. McDowell & Co. (1996) • The Supreme Court held that a law cannot be struck down merely because it is unjust, reaffirming Austinian positivism. 2. Historical School This school values customs, traditions, and the spirit of the people (Volksgeist). M. Ismail Faruqui v. Union of India (1994) • Context: Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute. • Relevance: Court considered the historical and customary significance of the site to the Hindu community. Collector of Madura v. Mootoo Ramalinga Sethupathi (1868) (Privy Council) • Recognized customary Hindu law, showing that law derives authority from age-old customs. 3. Sociological School This school focuses on law as a tool for social change and welfare. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997) • Relevance: Court laid down guidelines to prevent sexual harassment at workplace. • Reflection: Shows law evolving to meet social needs, even without specific legislation — Roscoe Pound’s theory of law as social engineering. Joseph Shine v. Union of India (2018) • Issue: Decriminalization of adultery. • Relevance: Reflected changing societal values, and the Court emphasized individual dignity over archaic morality. 4. Realist School Focuses on what courts actually do rather than what laws say. Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) • Relevance: Reflected the practical realities of political influence, and judicial discretion. State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh (1996) • The Court emphasized sensitivity to victims in rape cases, departing…
Jurisprudence: The Philosophy and Science of Law 🔹 Introduction Jurisprudence is the study, analysis, and philosophy of law. It delves deep into understanding what law is, how it evolves, and how it should function in society. The word “Jurisprudence” comes from Latin: Juris = Law Prudentia = Knowledge or Skill Thus, jurisprudence literally means “knowledge of law” or “legal skill”. 🔹 Origin and Nature The study of jurisprudence first began with Roman jurists. Think of it as what science is to nature, jurisprudence is to law—it explores the fundamentals, reasoning, and purpose behind legal systems. > “Jurisprudence is not concerned with the text of statutes but with the essence of law itself.” As Cicero described, jurisprudence is the philosophical aspect of law—examining why laws exist, how they should evolve, and their moral backbone. Jurisprudence, derived from the Latin term juris prudentia, meaning “knowledge of the law,” represents the theoretical and philosophical study of law. It explores the origin, purpose, structure, and enforcement of laws within society. The discipline has ancient roots, evolving over centuries through various cultures and legal traditions. • Origin of Jurisprudence The origin of jurisprudence can be traced back to classical civilizations: Ancient Rome: Roman law is considered one of the earliest and most influential legal systems. Thinkers such as Ulpian and Gaius laid the groundwork for systematic legal analysis. Roman jurisprudence was concerned with categorizing laws, defining legal principles, and ensuring justice through reasoned interpretation. Greek Philosophy: Philosophers like Plato and Aristotle explored the concept of justice, natural law, and the role of law in a well-ordered society. Aristotle’s notion of natural justice versus legal justice laid a foundation for later theories distinguishing between man-made laws and universal moral principles. Religious Legal Systems: In Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh), Jewish law (Halakha), and Canon law (Christian), jurisprudence took a theological form, interpreting divine commandments into legal doctrines. English Common Law Tradition: Jurisprudence developed through case law and judicial reasoning. Thinkers like Sir Edward Coke and William Blackstone emphasized precedent, legal customs, and the rights of individuals under the law. • Nature of Jurisprudence Jurisprudence is normative, analytical, and critical in nature. It does not merely describe laws but seeks to evaluate, interpret, and question their meaning and application. It can be broadly categorized into the following types: 1. Analytical Jurisprudence: Focuses on the logical structure of law, analyzing legal concepts such as rights, duties, sovereignty, and justice. It seeks clarity and coherence in legal language. H.L.A. Hart and Austin are major figures in this school. 2. Natural Law Jurisprudence: Argues that law should be based on morality or universal moral principles. Laws that are unjust or immoral, according to this view, may lack legitimacy. Thinkers include Cicero, St. Thomas Aquinas, and Lon Fuller. 3. Historical Jurisprudence: Emphasizes the evolutionary nature of law as shaped by customs, traditions, and societal needs. Savigny argued that law grows organically from the spirit (Volksgeist) of a people. 4. Sociological Jurisprudence: Sees law as a tool for social engineering. Law should be studied in its social context, not just as abstract rules. Roscoe Pound and Eugen Ehrlich are key proponents. 5. Critical Legal Studies: Emerged in the 20th century as a critique of traditional legal structures. It views law as a product of political and social power structures, often reinforcing inequality. Why is Jurisprudence Important? As per Salmond, jurisprudence serves several key purposes: 1. Thought-Provoking It introduces theoretical ideas that later influence real-world laws. Example: Natural rights (life, liberty) started as theory, became human rights laws. 2. Clarifies Legal Concepts It helps organize and simplify complex legal ideas. Example: The concept of legal personality—treating companies as “legal persons”. 3. Educational Value It trains legal minds to think logically and critically. Example: A judge may give justice over strict technicalities due to jurisprudential thinking. 4. Shapes Practical Laws Helps in modern lawmaking for current issues. Example: Emergence of cyber laws and AI regulations. Definitions by Great Jurists Ulpian: “Jurisprudence is the observation of things human and divine, the knowledge of the just and the unjust.” Cicero: Philosophical knowledge of law. Gray: “Science of law… systematic arrangement of rules followed by courts.” Salmond: “Science of the first principles of civil law.” John Austin: “Philosophy of positive law.” Allen: “Scientific synthesis of essential principles of law.” H.L.A. Hart: “Jurisprudence is the science of law, exploring legal concepts, systems, and the nature of law.” Salmond’s Classification of Jurisprudence 1. Expository or Systematic Jurisprudence Studies existing laws. Example: Analysis of the Indian Contract Act. 2. Legal History Explores how law has evolved over time. Example: Property or marriage laws from ancient to modern India. 3. Science of Legislation Suggests how laws should be made for future needs. Example: Laws for digital privacy or AI regulation. Austin’s Theory: Positive Law John Austin defined law as the command of the sovereign backed by sanction. His jurisprudence: Focuses on law as it is, not as it ought to be. • Divides jurisprudence into: ✓ General Jurisprudence: Legal principles common across systems. ✓ Particular Jurisprudence: Laws of a specific country (e.g., Indian Law). Example: √ Studying punishment in all countries = General √ Studying Indian Penal Code = Particular Criticism: Professor Holland disagreed with Austin’s division. He argued science should not be split into “general” and “particular” forms. Modern Perspectives on Jurisprudence H.L.A. Hart: System of Rules Hart divided laws into: √ Primary Rules: Tell us what to do (e.g., “Don’t steal”). √ Secondary Rules: Tell us how to create or enforce primary rules (e.g., Parliament’s power to legislate). He said a legal system is complete only when both rules exist together. Definitions of Law by Famous Thinkers J.C. Gray: Law = Rules enforced by courts. Salmond: Law = Principles applied by the state for justice. Roscoe Pound: Law = Social control through organized force. Paton: Law = Binding rules that regulate society. Kelson: Law = A technique of social organization, without political or ethical value. Austin: Law = Command of…
Muslim Law of Inheritance: Comprehensive, Just, and Ahead of Its Time The Muslim Law of Inheritance is not just a legal framework—it is a deeply rooted, well-structured, and equitable system that has stood the test of time. When discussing inheritance laws across the world, Islamic inheritance law must be at the top of the list for its clarity, fairness, and comprehensiveness. 🔸 What is Inheritance? Inheritance means the transfer of money or property to legal heirs after a person’s death. In Islamic law, this transfer is governed not by emotions or customs but by divine command and logical structure, balancing rights and responsibilities. • Why Muslim Law of Inheritance Stands Out 1. Comprehensiveness: It covers all possible relations — sharers, residuaries, and distant kindred. 2. Equity Over Equality: Shares are distributed based on financial responsibility, not gender alone. 3. Fixed Shares: The Qur’an specifies the shares of 12 types of relatives, leaving no room for ambiguity. 4. No Birthright: Unlike Hindu law, Muslim law doesn’t recognize inheritance by birth. The right to inherit arises only after the death of the property holder. 5. No Joint Family System: Property is individually owned, and inheritance is divided immediately upon death. • Major Reforms Introduced by Islam ✓ Females allowed to inherit — a revolutionary step in the 7th century! ✓ Widows, daughters, and mothers given fixed shares ✓ Husband and wife both inherit from each other ✓ Even distant kindred get a chance when no closer heirs exist ∆ Key Highlights of the System 1. Classes of Heirs • Sharers: 12 relations, including husband, wife, children, parents, siblings. • Residuaries: Male relatives who receive the leftover estate. • Distant Kindred: Relatives not in the above two groups inherit only if no sharers/residuaries exist. 2. Female Rights • Daughters, mothers, wives, and even sisters have defined inheritance rights. • A female gets half the share of a male, but this is due to less financial obligation, not lesser status. • Widow always inherits — 1/4th if childless, 1/8th if she has children. 3. Exclusion Rules (Hujub) • Closer relatives exclude distant ones. • Son excludes grandson, father excludes grandfather, full sibling excludes half-sibling, etc. 4. Illegitimacy and Homicide Illegitimate children cannot inherit from the father. A person cannot inherit from someone they murdered, whether intentionally or accidentally (Sunni law). ✓ Distribution: Science & Justice Combined Sunni Law uses Per Capita Method: Property is divided equally among heirs of the same class. Shia Law uses Per Strip Method: Property is divided based on branches of the family tree. • Unborn Child A child in the womb can inherit if born alive — showcasing how Islamic law even protects the rights of the unborn! • Escheat Rule If no legal heir exists, the property goes to the State (Government). • Testamentary vs. Non-Testamentary Succession Non-testamentary succession (no will): Follows Shariat Law. Testamentary succession (with will): Allowed only up to 1/3rd of the estate for non-heirs. √ In West Bengal, Chennai, and Mumbai, testamentary succession is governed by the Indian Succession Act, 1925. ∆ Why This System Deserves Global Recognition The Muslim law of inheritance predates and outperforms many modern legal systems. It provides: • A scientific method of share calculation • Rights to women, including widows and daughters • Protection to unborn children • Clear rules to avoid disputes > This is not just a law — it’s a legacy of justice. Muslim Law of Inheritance: A Model of Equity, Logic, and Divine Balance The Muslim Law of Inheritance is one of the most detailed and sophisticated systems of property division in any legal tradition. Rooted in divine revelation and developed through centuries of jurisprudence, this law ensures that wealth is distributed fairly, maintaining social harmony and justice in the family. In today’s legal landscape, where disputes over inheritance are common, the Islamic system stands at the top for its structured clarity, fixed shares, and protection for all genders and relations. What is Inheritance in Islam? Inheritance refers to the transfer of a deceased person’s property to their lawful heirs. In Islamic law, this transfer is not arbitrary—it is based on Quranic injunctions, ensuring that everyone gets what they rightfully deserve. > “Inheritance is a right, not a privilege.” ∆ Key Principles That Make Muslim Inheritance Law Unique 🔸 1. No Doctrine of Representation In Muslim law, heirs must be alive at the time of the ancestor’s death. If someone dies before the ancestor, their children do not inherit in their place. > Nearest heir excludes the more remote. This is unlike Hindu or English law, where representation is allowed. 🔸 2. Fixed Shares for Sharers There are 12 fixed sharers including the spouse, children, parents, and siblings. Their shares are clearly defined in the Qur’an, leaving little room for manipulation or favoritism. 🔸 3. Females Have Inheritance Rights Women inherit, although typically half the share of men. This is due to the financial responsibilities of men (e.g., dower, maintenance). Daughters, mothers, sisters, and widows are all entitled. ✓ Three Classes of Heirs Category Includes • Sharers Have fixed Quranic shares (e.g., spouse, children, parents) • Residuaries Inherit what remains after sharers (e.g., brothers, uncles) • Distant Kindred Blood relatives not included above (e.g., maternal uncles, aunts) ✓ Advanced Doctrines: Precision in Practice 🔷 Doctrine of Aul (Increase) If the total of the fixed shares exceeds 1 (unity), the shares are proportionally reduced. Example: Husband gets 1/2 Two full sisters get 2/3 Total = 7/6 → more than 1 Adjusted: Husband = 3/7, Sisters = 4/7 🔷 Doctrine of Radd (Return) If total shares are less than 1, and there is no residuary, the remaining portion returns to the sharers proportionately (except spouses). Example: Mother = 1/6, Daughter = 1/2 Total = 2/3 Adjusted: Mother = 1/4, Daughter = 3/4 Female Rights Underlined Widows: 1/4 share (if no children) 1/8 share (if there are children) Daughters: One daughter = 1/2 Two or more = collectively 2/3 With sons = become residuaries (each son gets…
What is Waqf? – A Comprehensive Guide under Muslim Law Waqf in Muslim Law: Meaning, Essentials, Types & Mutawalli,explore the concept of Waqf under Muslim Law. Learn its meaning, essential elements, types, creation, and the role of Mutawalli with key legal insights and case references. • Introduction to Waqf Waqf (also spelled Wakf) is an Islamic endowment of property to be held in trust and used for charitable or religious purposes. As defined by Abu Yusuf, it is the detention of a thing in the implied ownership of Almighty God, and its profits are used for the benefit of humanity. “Once a waqf, always a waqf” – Supreme Court of India Key Characteristics of Waqf 1. Irrevocability – Once declared, a waqf cannot be revoked. 2. Perpetuity – It is permanent and lasts forever. 3. Inalienability – The property cannot be sold, transferred, or inherited. 4. Charitable Use – The usufruct (benefits) must be used for pious or charitable purposes. 5. Absoluteness – Conditional or contingent waqf is void. Essentials of a Valid Waqf • Under Sunni (Hanafi) Law: √ Permanent dedication of property √ Waqif (dedicator) must be Muslim, sane, and major √ Purpose must be religious, pious, or charitable • Under Shia Law: √ Must be perpetual, unconditional √ Possession must be transferred √ Waqif cannot benefit from the waqf Types of Waqf 1. Public Waqf – For community welfare, e.g., mosques, schools 2. Private Waqf – For the benefit of family, known as Waqf-alal-aulad How is Waqf Created? • Modes of Creation: √ Inter vivos – During lifetime √ By Will – Testamentary waqf √ During illness – Limited to 1/3 of property without heirs’ consent √ By Immemorial User – Usage over time can imply waqf • Objects and Subjects of Waqf Valid Objectives: √ Mosques, Imambaras, Madrasas √ Quran reading, aid to pilgrims √ Support to poor and destitute Valid Properties: √ Tangible properties (not consumables) √ Immovable (land, buildings) or movable (books, stocks, cash) > Property must belong to the waqif. The Role of the Mutawalli (Manager) A mutawalli is a manager or superintendent of the waqf—not an owner. Eligibility: • Must be Indian citizen • Sound mind and adult • Can be male, female, or even non-Muslim (unless religious duties are involved) Appointment: By founder, executor, or Court ✓ Duties (per Section 50, Waqf Act 1995): • Follow directions of the Waqf Board • Submit returns and accounts • Allow inspections • Manage public dues ✓ Removal: • Breach of trust • Mismanagement or decay of waqf property • Failure to follow waqf objectives ∆ Doctrine of Cypress If the original purpose becomes impossible, courts may apply waqf property to a similar charitable purpose, preserving the intention of the waqif. Difference Between Waqf and Trust A Waqf under Muslim law is a permanent dedication of property for religious, pious, or charitable purposes, where the ownership is transferred to the Almighty God, and its benefits are used for the welfare of society. Once created, a waqf is irrevocable, perpetual, and must strictly adhere to Islamic principles. The manager, known as a Mutawalli, does not own the property but merely supervises its use according to the waqf’s objectives. In contrast, a Trust under the Indian Trusts Act, 1882, can be established for any lawful purpose, including private or family benefit. Unlike waqf, a trust may be revocable, and the founder may reserve benefits for themselves. The property in a trust is legally held by the trustee, who manages it for the benefit of the designated beneficiaries. Thus, while both serve as instruments for asset dedication and welfare, their legal nature, flexibility, and religious context differ significantly. Registration of Waqf • Under Section 36 of the Waqf Act, 1995: • Mandatory registration with the Waqf Board • Application must be filed within 3 months of creation • Can be applied by mutawalli, waqif, heirs, or Muslim community members Landmark Judgments on Waqf under Muslim Law 1. Vidya Varuthi Thirtha v. Baluswami Ayyar (1921) 48 IA 302 (PC) Court: Privy Council Key Point: • This is a foundational judgment defining Waqf in India. • The Privy Council held that under Muslim Law, when property is dedicated by way of waqf, the ownership passes to Almighty Allah. • Trustees (mutawalli) do not become owners; they merely administer the waqf property. “The idea of beneficial ownership is foreign to the concept of waqf under Muslim Law.” 2. Mohammad Ismail Ariff v. Ahmad Moolla Dawood (1915) ILR 42 Cal 904 Court: Calcutta High Court Key Point: • Clarified that waqf is irrevocable and perpetual. • Once created validly, the waqif (settlor) loses all ownership. 3. M Kazim v. A Asghar Ali (1932) 59 IA 94 (PC) Court: Privy Council Key Point: • Distinguished waqf-alal-aulad (waqf for descendants) and clarified that it is valid if: • The ultimate benefit is reserved for charitable or religious purposes. 4. Abdul Fata Mohd. v. Rasamaya Dhur Chowdhury (1894) ILR 22 Cal 619 (PC) Court: Privy Council Key Point: • Ruled that if a waqf is only for the family and descendants and does not reserve any ultimate religious or charitable object, it is invalid. 5. Mst. Amina Bibi v. Abdul Rahman (AIR 1923 All 152) Court: Allahabad High Court Key Point: • Waqf is not a gift (hiba); it is a separate legal institution where the ownership is divinely vested. 6. Asghar Ali v. Union of India (AIR 1965 SC 1604) Court: Supreme Court of India Key Point: • Validated government’s right to take over management of waqf property in case of mismanagement or public interest. 7. Board of Muslim Wakfs v. Radha Kishan (1979 AIR 289; 1979 SCR (2) 1) Court: Supreme Court of India Key Point: • Defined the jurisdiction of Waqf Boards and stated that the civil courts have jurisdiction unless expressly barred. 8. Radhakanta Deb v. Commissioner of Hindu Religious Endowments (1981 AIR 798) Court: Supreme Court of India Key Point: • Though not directly on waqf, it clarified…