Ibrahim v. The Perumattom Mahallu Jama-Ath Committee
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/19TH JYAISHTA, 1937 OP (WAKF).No. 39 of 2014 (R) ----------------------------- PETITIONER(S):
------------- IBRAHIM, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.MAKKAR, VELAKKATH HOUSE, VELLOORKUNNAM VILLAGE, PERUMATTOM, PUTHUPADY P.O., ERNAKULAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU SRI.K.A.NOUSHAD SRI.P.U.VINOD KUMAR SRI.KANDAMPULLY RAHUL SRI.MITHUN BABY JOHN SRI.J.RAMKUMAR RESPONDENT(S):
-------------
1. THE PERUMATTOM MAHALLU JAMA-ATH COMMITTEE, PERUMATTOM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, 686673.
2. V.M.EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST, PERUMATTOM, PUTHUPPADY P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, 686673.
3. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA STATE WAKF BOARD, V.I.P.ROAD, KALOOR KOCHI-17.
R1,R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.K.MOHAMMED PUZHAKKARA R BY SRI.K.SHIBILI NAHA, SC, KERALA STATE WAKF BOARD THIS OP (WAKF) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09-06-2015,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP (WAKF).No. 39 of 2014 (R) ----------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS -------------------------- EXHIBIT-P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE LEASE DEED NO.3596/2013 OF S.R.O., MUVATTUPUZHA.
EXHIBIT-P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.45/2013 OF HON'BLE WAKF TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT-P3: A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 13/3/2014 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P4: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23/10/2014 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS -------------------------: NIL /TRUE COPY/ PS TO JUDGE.
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN & SUNIL THOMAS, JJ.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O.P.(WAKF).No. 39 of 2014 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 9th day of June, 2015
JUDGMENT
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties, including the standing counsel for the Wakf Board.
2. The petitioner and others have instituted Ext.P2 suit before the Wakf Tribunal challenging the grant of Ext.P1, which is purported to be a lease deed. During the pendency of that suit, a complaint filed by the petitioner and others about certain matters in relation to the management of the first respondent-Perumattom Mahallu Jama-ath, was taken up by the Chief Executive Officer of the Board and Ext.P4 was issued essentially making reference to the contents of Ext.P1 and the entrustment. We think that such a decision, as contained in Ext.P4, that too, issued on a complaint filed by the petitioner and others, cannot be utilised by either of the parties to fork the adjudication of Ext.P2. We are also of the view that, having regard to the nature of the jurisdiction of the Wakf Tribunal in terms of the Wakf Act 1995, it is within the domain of
O.P.(WAKF) No.39/2014 the Wakf Tribunal to consider any interlocutory orders for regulating the parties and their conduct during the pendency of Ext.P2 suit. Under the aforesaid circumstances, Ext.P4 is quashed and the parties are left with liberty to seek relief, including interlocutory, from the Wakf Tribunal, in accordance with law.
Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN Judge Sd/- SUNIL THOMAS Judge dpk /True copy/ PS to Judge.
O.P.(WAKF) No.39/2014