JUDGMENT : Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J. By the impugned order being No. 10 dated 27th September, 2016 passed by the Learned Waqf Tribunal, West Bengal in Suit No.3 of 2016, the parties were directed to maintain status quo position over the suit property till the disposal of the suit or until further order. 2. The legality and/or propriety of the said order of injunction passed by the learned Tribunal is under challenge in this first miscellaneous appeal at the instance of the defendant No.1/appellant. 3. When the instant appeal was taken up for hearing for admission under the provision of Order 41 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, an objection is raised by Mr. Bhattacharya, learned advocate appearing for the respondent as to the maintainability of the said appeal in view of the bar created under section 83(9) of the Waqf Act, 1995. Section 83(9) of the said Act runs as follows:- "Section 83(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 an 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. Considering the said provision of the Waqf Act, we hold that no appeal lies against the impugned order before this Court. 5. Hence, we decline to admit this appeal. 6. The appeal thus, stands dismissed on the ground of its entertainability. 7. However, this order will not preclude the appellant from seeking appropriate relief in appropriate forum in accordance with law. 8. On the prayer of Mr. Hoy Chowdhury, learned senior advocate appearing for the appellant, we permit the learned advocate-on-record of the appellant to take back the original certified copy of the impugned order by supplying a true photostat copy of the same from the concerned department. 9. The appeal is thus, disposed of. 10. Since the appeal is disposed of in the manner as aforesaid, no further order need be passed on the injunction application. 11. 9. The appeal is thus, disposed of. 10. Since the appeal is disposed of in the manner as aforesaid, no further order need be passed on the injunction application. 11. The application for injunction being CAN 10820 of 2016 is thus, deemed to be disposed of. 12. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the Learned advocates for the parties immediately.