ORDER D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.—Petition under Section 24 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [CPC] seeking for transfer of OS No 2 of 2010 pending on the file of the Wakf Tribunal, Gulbarga to the Wakf Tribunal at Bangalore, by the plaintiffs in the suit. Reasons urged in the petition for the transfer are that the petitioners have lost faith and confidence in the learned presiding officer of the tribunal at Gulbarga, in view of the attitude and behaviour of the presiding officer, who, it appears, had expressed that the suit was not tenable and may have to be dismissed for want of jurisdiction etc. 2. Appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submission of Sri N. Krishnacharya, learned counsel, is that the wakf tribunal is on par with a civil court; that the jurisdiction conferred on the wakf tribunal is a jurisdiction which is otherwise available with civil courts and therefore petitioners-plaintiffs are entitled to file a petition under Section 24 CPC seeking for transfer of the suit to any other wakf tribunal for seeking relief in accordance with law, particularly, as the petitioners have lost confidence in the manner of functioning of the presiding officer of the tribunal and that the high court, has such power in terms of Section 24 CPC and therefore the petition may be admitted and notice issued to the respondents etc. 3. Wakf tribunals are special tribunals created under Section 83 of the Wakf Act, 1995 [for short, the Act]. Section 53 reads as under: 83. Constitution of Tribunals, etc.- (1) The State Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute as many Tribunals as it may think fit, for the determination of any dispute, question or other matter relating to a wakf or wakf property under this Act and define the local limits and jurisdiction under this Act of each of such Tribunals. (2) Any mutawalli person interested in a wakf or any other person aggrieved by an order made under this Act or rules made thereunder, may make an application within the time specified in this Act or where no such time has been specified, within such time as may be prescribed, to the Tribunal for the determination of any dispute, question or other matter relating to the wakf. (3) Where any application made under subsection (1) relates to any wakf property which falls within the territorial limits of the jurisdiction of two or more Tribunals, such application may be made to the Tribunal within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the mutawalli or any one of the mutawallis of the wakf actually and voluntarily resides, carries on business or personally works for gain, and, where any such application is made to the Tribunal aforesaid, the other Tribunal or Tribunals having jurisdiction shall not entertain any application for the determination of such dispute, question or other matter: Provided that the State Government may, if it is of opinion that it is expedient in the interest of (he wakf or any other person interested in the wakf or the wakf property to transfer such application to any other Tribunal having jurisdiction for the determination of the dispute, question or other matter relating to such wakf or wakf property, transfer such application to any oilier Tribunal having jurisdiction, and, on such transfer, the Tribunal to which the application is so transferred shall deal with the application from the stage which was reached before the Tribunal from which the application has been so transferred, except where the Tribunal is of opinion that it is necessary in the interest of justice to deal with the application afresh. (4) Every Tribunal shall consist of one person, who shall be a member of the State Judicial Service holding a rank, not below that of a District. Sessions or Civil Judge, Class I, and the appointment of every such person may be made either by name or by designation. (5) The Tribunal shall be deemed to be a civil court and shall have the same powers as may be exercised by a civil court under e Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), while trying a suit. or executing a decree or order. (6) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), the Tribunal shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed. or executing a decree or order. (6) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), the Tribunal shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed. (7) The decision of the Tribunal shall be final and binding upon the parties to the application and it shall have the force of a decree made by a civil court (8) The execution of any decision of the Tribunal shall be made by the civil court to which such decision is sent for execution in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908). (9) No appeal shall lie against any decision or order whether interim or otherwise, given or made by the Tribunal: Provided that a High Court may, on its own motion or on the application of the Board or any person aggrieved, call for and examine the records relating to any dispute, question or other matter which has been determined by the Tribunal for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of such determination and may confirm, reverse or modify such determination or pass such other order as it may think fit. 4. Under Section 85 of the Act, reading as under: 85. Bar of jurisdiction of civil courts - No suit or other legal proceeding shall lie in any civil court in respect of any dispute, question or other matter relating to any wakf, wakf property or other matter which is required by or under this Act to he determined by a Tribunal. in respect of matters over which tribunal has jurisdiction to that extent, the jurisdiction of civil court is barred. 5. While under sub-section (9) of Section 83, no appeal is provided in respect of decisions by a wakf tribunal, a suo motu power on an application of the aggrieved person, a jurisdiction to examine records of the proceedings of a wakf tribunal is conferred on the high court, a power akin to revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 CPC. 6. With all these, a wakf tribunal is not either a civil court or a court subordinate to the high court for the purpose of Section 24 CPC, reading as under: 24. 6. With all these, a wakf tribunal is not either a civil court or a court subordinate to the high court for the purpose of Section 24 CPC, reading as under: 24. General power of transfer and withdrawal.- (1) On the application of any of the parties and after notice to the parties and after hearing such or them as desire to be heard, or of its own motion without such notice, the High Court or the District Court may, at any stage.- (a) transfer any suit appeal or other proceeding pending before it for trial or disposal to any Court subordinate to it and competent to try or dispose of the same, or (b) withdraw any suit, appeal or other proceeding pending in any Court subordinate to it, and (i) try or dispose of the same; or (ii) transfer the for trial or disposal to any Court subordinate to it and competent to try or dispose of the same; or (iii) retransfer the same for trial or disposal to the Court from which it was withdrawn. (2) Where any suit or proceeding has been transferred or withdrawn under sub-section (1), the Court which 1/is thereafter to try or dispose of such suit or proceeding' may, subject to any special directions in the case of an order of transfer, either retry it or proceed from the point at which it was transferred or withdrawn. (3) For the purposes of this section- (a) Courts of Additional and Assistant Judges shall be deemed to be subordinate to the District Court; (b) ''proceeding" includes a proceeding for the execution of a decree of order. (4) The Court trying any suit transferred or withdrawn under this section from a Court of Small Causes shall, for the purposes of such suit, be deemed to be a Court of Small Causes (5) A suit or proceeding may he transferred under this section from a Court which has no jurisdiction to try it. 7. Even while under sub-section (5) of Section 24 CPC, high court and district courts have been conferred power to transfer a suit or proceedings from a court which has jurisdiction to try it etc., I do not find specific power under Section 24 CPC either to withdraw or transfer proceedings before a wakf tribunal constituted under Section 83 of the Act. 8. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of a Division Bench of this court in the case of Noreen R. Srikanth v. L. Dasarath Ramaiah, Gulbarga, wherein this court had taken the view that motor accidents claims tribunal constituted under the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 [for short, MV Act] is a court subordinate to the high court for the purpose of Sections 24 and 25 CPC and therefore on the ratio of this judgment, the present petition under Section 24 CPC is tenable. 9. This court in the reported case though examined a situation which arose under the provisions of MV Act, 1939 and the constitution of a claims tribunal under Sections 10, 110B and 110C of the MV Act, which vested jurisdiction of civil court for bringing action in tort seeking for compensation in respect of damages due to accidents involving motor vehicles to be on roads, which was a jurisdiction otherwise available with civil courts, but now vested in the claims tribunals in terms of Sections 110, 110B and 110C of MV Act and noticing that under the scheme of the MV Act, 1939, a miscellaneous first appeal lies to the high court and in such circumstance, it was interpreted that motor accident claims tribunals which were manned by district judges, who had been notified as tribunals for the purpose of section 11 of the MV Act, 1939, but continued to remain district judge exercising such jurisdiction and powers as are otherwise conferred on them not only under the provisions of CPC but also under other enactments, who are also within the supervision of high courts, was held to be court subordinate to high court for the purpose of Section 24 CPC. 10. 10. Situation under Section 83 of the Act is totally different and the wakf tribunals being special tribunals with limited jurisdiction and in fact if it is to be taken as any clue in the Act itself, it is in sub-section (5) of Section 89, which provision, by a fiction, makes wakf tribunal a civil court for the purpose of conferring the powers which civil court exercises while trying suits under the provisions of CPC, the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 89 are salient, which specifically confers power to transfer a matter pending before one tribunal to another tribunal, if both tribunals have concurrent jurisdiction, in the sense, properties of a particular wakf are spread over the jurisdiction of two wakf tribunals and such power being conferred on the state government under the Act. The wakf tribunals remains a tribunal with a limited jurisdiction and does not get itself elevated to the status of civil court exercising jurisdiction under Section 9 CPC or a 'court subordinate' within the meaning of Section 3 CPC read with Section 24 CPC, in spite of the fiction created under sub-section 5 of Section 89 of the Act. 11. Even otherwise, I am not impressed that the ground urged in support of this petition seeking for transfer, as a question of jurisdiction is not a matter of personal opinion or a matter that can be sought to be involving a subjective element, but is a pure question of law and if tribunal, prima facie, has expressed the view that in respect of some matters, tribunal may not have jurisdiction, an observation of this nature cannot be said to be an observation made by the presiding officer with a biased mind or with any prejudice against the petitioners. 12. Petitioners apprehension is more imaginary than being a real one and therefore I find no merit in the matter and the petition is dismissed. In view of dismissal of civil petition, application in Misc Cvl No 153660 of 2011 for stay does not survive for consideration and it is accordingly dismissed.