JUDGMENT Inderjeet Singh, J. - The appellant has filed the present appeal against the order dated 5.8.2003 passed by the Additional District Judge No. 1, Bayana, District Bharatpur in Civil Appeal No. 59/1994. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent No. 1 filed an application before the Estate Officer under Sections 5 and 7 of the Rajasthan Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1964 (for short, ''The Act of 1964'') against respondent No. 2 for eviction and arrears of rent with regard to the land in dispute as he was unauthorisedly occupying the land in dispute. The Estate Officer vide order dated 24.12.1988 allowed the application filed by the respondent No. 1 and passed an order of eviction against respondent No. 2. 3. Being aggrieved by the order dated 24.12.1988, the present appellant has filed an appeal under Section 9 of the Act of 1964 before the District Judge, Bharatpur along with an application under Order 7, Rule 10 C.P.C. seeking leave to file an appeal claiming therein that he is in possession of the land in dispute. The said appeal was transferred later on to the Court of ADJ, Bayana. 4. The Court of ADJ No. 1, Bayana vide order dated 5.8.2003 decided the application filed by the respondent No. 1 under Order 7, Rule 10 C.P.C. in view of the provisions of Section 85 of the Waqf Act, 1995 and the appeal filed by the appellant was returned back for filing of the same before the Wakf Tribunal. 5. Being aggrieved, the appellant has preferred the present appeal against the order dated 5.8.2003. 6. Counsel for the appellant argued that the controversy involved in this matter has already been settled by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Sardar Khan & Ors. vs. Syed Najmul Hasan (Seth) & Ors., 2007(2) WLC (SC) Civil 264 therein the Hon''ble Supreme Court after considering the provisions of Wakf Act, 1995 has held in paras 8, 10, 11 and 12 as under: 8. Learned Counsel for the Appellants has invited our attention to subsection (5) of Section 7 and submitted that the attention of the learned Single Judge was not invited to sub-section (5) of section 7 of The Wakf Act, 1995. Learned Counsel for the Appellants has invited our attention to subsection (5) of Section 7 and submitted that the attention of the learned Single Judge was not invited to sub-section (5) of section 7 of The Wakf Act, 1995. It was submitted that learned Single Judge decided the matter on the basis of Section 85 of the Act de hors sub-section (5) of Section 7 of the Act. Section 85 of the Act reads as under: "85. Bar of jurisdiction of Civil Courts. - Ho 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 be determined by a Tribunal". Learned Counsel further submitted that the learned Single Judge has wrongly relied upon the judgment in Syed Inamul Haq Shah''s case (supra) and set aside the judgment and decree passed by the Addl. District Judge, Jaipur, because in this case also learned Single Judge did not consider sub-section (5) of Section 7 and decided the matter solely on the basis of Section 85 of the Act. Hence, the impugned decision given by learned Single Judge is not correct and not in accordance with Section 7(5) and with proposition of law. 10. It is relevant to mention here that the Wakf Act, 1995 came into force with effect from 1.1.1996. section 6 of the Wakf Act, 1995 relates to the disputes regarding wakfs property. Section 6 of the Act reads as under: "6. Disputes regarding wakfs. If any question arises whether a particular property specified as wakf property in the list of wakfs is wakf property or not or whether a wakf specified in such list is a Shia wakf or Sunni wakf, the Board or the mutawalli of the wakf or any person interested therein may institute a suit in a Tribunal for the decision of the question and the decision of the Tribunal in respect of such matter shall be final: Provided that no such suit shall be entertained by the Tribunal after the expiry of one year from the date of the publication of the list of wakfs. Explanation-For the purposes of this section and Section 7, the expression "any person interested therein", shall, in relation to any property specified as wakf property in the list of wakfs published after the commencement of this Act, shall include also every person who, though not interested in the wakf concerned, is interested in such property and to whom a reasonable opportunity had been afforded to represent his case by notice served on him in that behalf during the course of the relevant inquiry under Section 4. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), no proceeding under this Act in respect of any wakf shall be stayed by reason only of the pendency of any such suit or of any appeal or other proceeding arising out of such suit. (3) The Survey Commissioner shall not be made a party to any suit under subsection (1) and no suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against him in respect of anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done in pursuance of this Act or any rules made thereunder. (4) The list of wakfs shall, unless it is modified in pursuance of a decision or the Tribunal under sub-section (1), be final and conclusive. (5) On and from the commencement of this Act in a State, no suit or other legal proceeding shall be instituted or commenced in a Court in that State in relation to any question referred to in subsection (1)." 11. From a perusal of the afore-quoted Section, there is no ambiguity that the intention was that from 1.1.1996 no suit or other legal proceedings relating to the wakf property shall be instituted in any Civil Court. 12. At the same time sub-section (5) of Section 7 also lays down that it will not affect any pending suit or appeal. Section 7 states the powers of the Tribunal to determine disputes regarding wakfs. Section 7 of the Act reads as under :- "7. 12. At the same time sub-section (5) of Section 7 also lays down that it will not affect any pending suit or appeal. Section 7 states the powers of the Tribunal to determine disputes regarding wakfs. Section 7 of the Act reads as under :- "7. Power of Tribunal to determine disputes regarding wakfs.-(1) If, after the commencement of this Act, any question arises, whether a particular property specified as wakf property in a list of wakfs is wakf property or not, or whether a wakf specified in such list is a Shia wakf or a Sunni wakf, the Board or the mutawalli of the wakf, or any person interested therein, may apply to the Tribunal having jurisdiction in relation to such property, for the decision of the question and the decision of the Tribunal thereon shall be final: Provided that- (a) in the case of the list of wakfs relating to any part of the State and published after the commencement of this Act no such application shall be entertained after the expiry of one year from the date of publication of the list of wakfs; and (b) in the case of the list of wakfs relating to any part of the State and published at any time within a period of one year immediately preceding the commencement of this Act, such an application may be entertained by Tribunal within the period of one year from such commencement: Provided further that where any such question has been heard and finally decided by a Civil Court in a suit instituted before such commencement, the Tribunal shall not re-open such question. (2) Except where the Tribunal has no jurisdiction by reason of the provisions of sub-section (5), no proceeding under this section in respect of any wakf shall be stayed by any Court, Tribunal or other authority by reason only of the pendency of any suit, application or appeal or other proceeding arising out of any such suit, application, appeal or other proceeding. (3) the Chief Executive Officer shall not be made a party to any application under sub-section (1). (4) The list of wakfs and where any such list is modified in pursuance of a decision of the Tribunal under sub-section (1), the list as so modified, shall be final. (3) the Chief Executive Officer shall not be made a party to any application under sub-section (1). (4) The list of wakfs and where any such list is modified in pursuance of a decision of the Tribunal under sub-section (1), the list as so modified, shall be final. (5) The Tribunal shall not have jurisdiction to determine any matter which is the subject-matter of any suit or proceeding instituted or commenced in a Civil Court under sub-section (1) of Section 6, before the commencement of this Act or which is the subject-matter of any appeal from the decree passed before such commencement in any such suit or proceeding or of any application for revision or review arising out of such suit, proceeding or appeal, as the case may be." 7. Counsel for the appellant has also taken us to the para 15 of the judgment of Hon''ble Supreme Court which reads as under: "15. On a conjoint reading of sub-section (5) of Section 7 and Section 85, the result would be that the Act will not be applicable to the pending suits or proceedings or appeals or revisions which have commenced prior to 1.1.1996, i.e., coming into force of the Wakf Act, 1995. Therefore, the view taken by the learned Single judge was not correct in the case of Syed Inamul Haq Shah (supra). Hence, in view of the above discussion, we are of the view that the learned Single Judge has gone wrong in relying on the decision rendered by the Single Judge in the case of Syed Inamul Haq Shah (supra). Consequently, the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the1 High Court for deciding the appeal in accordance with law, expeditiously." 8. In that view of the matter, Counsel for the appellant contended that the matter be remanded back to the Civil Court for its adjudication. 9. On the other hand, Counsel for the respondent very fairly admits the legal position as held by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Sardar Khan & Ors. (supra). 10. In that view of the matter, the appeal is allowed. The order dated 5.8.2003 passed by the Court below is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Lower Appellate Court for deciding the same on merits. (supra). 10. In that view of the matter, the appeal is allowed. The order dated 5.8.2003 passed by the Court below is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Lower Appellate Court for deciding the same on merits. Both the parties are directed to remain present before the Appellate Court on 1.11.2017.