Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Completion of wakf
The formation of a wakf is complete when a
mutawalli is first appointed for the wakf. The
mutalwalli can be a third person or the wakif
himself. When a third person is appointed as
mutawalli, mere declaration of the appointment
and endowment by the wakif is enough. If the
wakif appoints himself as the first mutawalli, the
only requirement is that the transaction should be
bona fide. There is no need for physical possession
or transfer of property from his name as owner to
his name as mutawalli.
In both the cases, however, mere intention of
setting aside the property for wakf is not enough. A
declaration to that effect is also required.
In Garib Das vs M A Hamid AIR 1970, it was
held that in cases where founder of the wakf
himself is the first mutawalli, it is not necessary
that the property should be transferred from the
name of the donor as the owner in his own name
as mutawalli.
Shia law -
Revocation of Wakf
In India, once a valid wakf is created it cannot be
revoked because no body has the power to divest
God of His ownership of a property. It can neither
be given back to the wakif nor can it be sold to
someone else, without court's permission.
A wakf created inter vivos is irrevocable. If the
wakif puts a condition of revocability, the wakf is
invalid. However, if the wakf has not yet come into
existence, it can be canceled. Thus, a testamentary
wakf can be canceled by the owner himself before
his death by making a new will. Further, wakf
created on death bed is valid only up till 1/3 of the
wakif's property. Beyond that, it is invalid and the
property does not go to wakf but goes to heirs
instead.
Mutawalli
Mutawalli is nothing but the manager of a wakf. He
is not the owner or even a trustee of the property.
He is only a superintendent whose job is the see
that the usufructs of the property are being utilized
for valid purpose as desired by the wakif. He has to
see that the intended beneficiaries are indeed
getting the benefits. Thus, he only has a limited
control over the usufructs.
In Ahmad Arif vs Wealth Tax Commissioner