The Kerala High Court set aside the impugned order dismissing the suit for default and restored the matter before the Wakf Tribunal. The court directed parties to appear on a specified date to report a settlement or pursue trial.
Impugned order set aside; suit restored; parties directed to appear on 21.8.2012.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN &
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST 2012/12TH SRAVANA 1934
CRP.No. 542 of 2007 (D)
WOS.21/2004 of WAKF TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM
REVISION PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF:
KUNJEEN MUSLIAR, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O KUNNATH VEETTIL MUHAMMED, KOTTAPPURAM P.O., OTTAPPALAM TALUK.
BY ADV. SRI.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ
RESPONDENT(S)/DEFENDANTS:
1. MEPPARA JUMA MASJID COMMITTEE, KULUKKIYAD AMSOM, KOTTAPPURAM P.O., OTTAPPALAM TALUK, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY SHOUKATH MUSLIAR.
2. MEPPARA JUMA MASJID COMMITTEE, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, KOTTUKADAN, AVARA HAJI, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, S/O MUHAMMED HAJI, KULUKKILIYAD, OTTAPPALAM TALUK.
BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN BY ADV. SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA
THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03-08-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
AS
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
&
K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JJ.
----------------------------------C.R.P.No.542 of 2007
Dated this the 3rd day of August, 2012
O R D E R
Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan,J.
1.The matter relates to a Juma-ath. The plaintiff was its president at one point of time. He allegedly spent some fund for conducting a suit in a court. Later, it appears that there was some consensus and that the suit was thereafter not represented before the proper court and prosecuted. The Juma-ath wanted him to pay the monies spent for that suit. The plaintiff, therefore, filed the suit from which this revision arises. That is a suit for injunction against enforcement of the Juma-ath's decision. It appears that the plaintiff was not diligent in prosecuting that suit though it is also to be noted that both the parties wanted the suit to be live.
CRP.542/07
2
CRP.542/07
3
round also he was absent. Prior conduct is no ground to refuse restoration on a later default. This is well settled. On the totality of the facts and circumstances, we are inclined to think that sufficient cause was shown for restoration of the suit.
In the result, the impugned order is set aside and W.O.S.No.21/04 on the file of the Wakf Tribunal, Ernakulam is restored. The parties are directed to mark appearance before the Tribunal on 21.8.2012. We are sure that the parties will, on that day, report settlement of the litigation and file such report as may be necessary to enable the court below to close the suit on consensus. Of course, if that does not work out, the matter will be put to trial. CRP ordered accordingly.
Sd/THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN Judge.
Sd/K.VINOD CHANDRAN
Judge. kkb.7/8.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the impugned order dismissing the suit due to default should be set aside and the suit restored for a final opportunity to settle or conclude the matter.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kunjeen Musliar
Meppara Juma Masjid Committee
Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan
K.Vinod Chandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
