Partly allowed

Irinchayam Maithani Puthenpalli Muslim Jama-Ath v. Sajad Saher. M

Kerala HC8 Nov 2023OP (WAKF)/34/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition directed the Wakf Tribunal to decide an amendment application for a declaratory prayer within an existing suit for injunction. Held that the matter is fit for disposal without issuing notice to respondents as the prayer requires immediate decision.

What did the court decide?

Issued directions to the Tribunal to decide the amendment application I.A.No.822 of 2023 before proceeding with the trial of the suit expeditiously.

Irinchayam Maithani Puthenpalli Muslim Jama-Ath Vs… — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA

¶6

WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 17TH KARTHIKA, 1945
OP (WAKF) NO. 34 OF 2023

¶7

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT OS 14/2023 OF WAKF TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE
PETITIONER(S)/1st PLAINTIFF:

¶8

1IRINCHAYAM MAITHANI PUTHENPALLI MUSLIM JAMA-ATH
POOVATHUR P. O NEDUMANGAD, THRIVANANTHAPURAM
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NIZARUDEEN,
AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. ABBAR, PIN – 695561

¶9

2 NIZARUDEEN A

¶10

AGED 50 YEARS

¶11

S/O. ABBAR KIZHKKUMKAREVEEDU, IRINCHAYAM P. O
NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695561
BY ADVS.

¶12

SREEKANTH S.NAIR
SANDEEP P JOHNSON

¶13

RESPONDENT(S)/3RD DEFENDANTS:

¶14

1 SAJAD SAHER. M AGED 55 YEARS

¶15

S/O. ISMAIL. AYANIMOODUVEEDU, IRINCHAYAM P. O
NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695561

¶16

2 MUHAMMEDJAJI AGED 60 YEARS S/O. SHAMSUDEEN SAMEER MANSIL, THANNIMOODU IRINCHAYAM P. O ,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695561

¶17

3 CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE O/O. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE NEDUGMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695541

¶18

4 KERALA STATE WAKF BOARD KERALA STATE WAKF BOARD, KALOOR, KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER., PIN – 682017

¶19

OP (WAKF) NO. 34 OF 2023

¶20

-2-

¶21

5 HASHIM

¶22

AGED 38 YEARS
S/O. SALIM, SECRETARY, IRINCHAYAM MAITHANI PUTHENPALLI
JAMA- ATH, POOVATHOOR, POOVATHOOR P. O, NEDUMANGAD,
NEDUMANGAD VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695561

¶23

6SALIM
AGED 62 YEARS
PRESIDENT, IRINCHAYAM MAITHANI PUTHENPALLI JAMA- ATH,
POOVATHOOR, POOVATHOOR P. O, NEDUMANGAD, NEDUMANGAD
VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695561

¶24

BY ADV.

¶25

SRI JAMSHEED HAFIZ SC WAQF

¶26

THIS OP (WAKF) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON
08.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶27

OP (WAKF) NO. 34 OF 2023 -3-

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

AMIT RAWAL, J.

¶30

Petitioners are plaintiffs in the suit bearing No.14 of 2023 wherein a decree of prohibitory injunction has been sought against respondents Nos.1 and 2 restraining their men and agent for forcibly entering into Jama-ath property and holding of General Body on 26.02.2023 at a particular time. The suit was filed on 20.02.2023. Opposite party had already appeared and filed the objection. However, in June, 2023 an application Ext.P10 for seeking amendment of Paragraph No.9 of the plaint as well as the prayer, was submitted in the following manner:

¶31

“ (a) Amendment sought to be incorporated as para 9(a) after para 9 in the O.S.

¶32

9(a) The officer appointed by the Kerala State Waqf Board visited the Jama- ath premises on

¶33

OP (WAKF) NO. 34 OF 2023 -4-

¶34

26.02.2023 and filed report dated 03.03.2023 before this Hon’ble Tribunal. It is stated in the report that the existing Jama- ath has not called any meeting of its members. At 2:30 PM around 125-150 persons came to the Jama- ath premises and conducted a meetings and they unilaterally elected 11 members and declared it as the committee and ade defendant 6 & 7 are nominated as Secretary and President of the committee. The said meeting was unlawful and the election was illegal and violation of the provisions of the bye-law. According to the byelaw the General Body was convened on 30.12.2022 and the election was conducted and 11 members including President and Secretary were also elected. The claim of the add’l defendants 6 & 7 that they are the president, secretary of the Jama- ath and their 11 member committee is the original committee is false and such a committee never came into existence and the meeting and election of the committee on 26.02.2023 is void ab initio, and hence the same has to be set aside accordingly.

¶35

(b) Amendment sought to be incorporated as para D after para C in the prayer portion of the suit.

¶36

D) A decree declaring the meeting and the election of the 11 member committee

¶37

OP (WAKF) NO. 34 OF 2023 -5-

¶38

conducted on 26.02.2023 is null and void and liable to be set aside.

¶39

¶40

10 (a) valuation of prayer D, declaration to set aside, u/s. 25 (d) (ii) of the Kerala Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act, 1959 Rs. 1,000/-. Court fee payable is Rs. 40/-.”

¶41

It is contended that the Tribunal has not adjudicated

¶42

the said application and posted the matter for evidence.

¶43

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and appraised the paper book and of the view that it is a fit case for disposal of the petition without issuing notice to the respondents as it will defray the cost of litigation, for, the prayer for seeking the amendment as sought is required to be decided either way and cannot be permitted to be kept pending. It would be improper for the Tribunal to proceed ahead with the trial as the evidence would

¶44

OP (WAKF) NO. 34 OF 2023 -6-

¶45

be beyond the pleadings.

¶46

Accordingly we dispose off the petition by issuing directions to the Tribunal to decide

¶47

I.A.No.822 of 2023, for amendment before

¶48

proceeding ahead with the trial of the suit as expeditiously as possible. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the next posting date of the suit before the Tribunal is 16.11.2023. Copy of order is directed to be handed over by hand.

¶49

Sd/-

¶50

AMIT RAWAL JUDGE

¶51

Sd/-

¶52

C.S. SUDHA
JUDGE

¶53

vv

¶54

OP (WAKF) NO. 34 OF 2023 -7-

¶55

APPENDIX OF OP (WAKF) 34/2023

¶56

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶57

`EXHIBIT`	`P1` `TRUE COPY OF O.S NO. 14/2023 FILED BY` `PETITIONERS BEFORE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL.`
`EXHIBIT`	`P2` `TRUE COPY OF I. A NO. 135/2023 FILED` `BY THE PETITIONER.`
`EXHIBIT`	`P3` `TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED` `03.03.2023 SUBMITTED BY LD CLERK OF` `4TH RESPONDENT.`
`EXHIBIT`	`P3 (A)` `TRUE TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P3.`
`EXHIBIT`	`P4` `TRUE COPY OF I. A NO. 193/2023 FILED` `BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE THE` `HON'BLE TRIBUNAL.`
`EXHIBIT`	`P5` `TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.C2-SR- 84/2023` `DATED 19.05.2023 ISSUED BY CHIEF` `EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA STATE WAQF` `BOARD.`
`EXHIBIT`	`P5 (A)` `TRUE TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P5.`
`EXHIBIT`	`P6` `TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.` `A8-4433/2020/TVM DATED 17.06.2023` `ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO ADV.` `M. ZIYAD .`
`EXHIBIT`	`P6 (A)` `TRUE TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P6.`
`EXHIBIT`	`P7` `TRUE COPY OF ABSTRACT PROCEEDINGS OF` `HON'BLE WAQF TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE DATED` `11.09.2023.`
`EXHIBIT`	`P8` `TRUE COPY OF ABSTRACT PROCEEDINGS OF` `HON'BLE WAQF TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE DATED` `26.09.2023.`

¶58

OP (WAKF) NO. 34 OF 2023 -8-

¶59

`EXHIBIT P9`	`TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION IN I. A` `439/2023 FILED BY THE PETITIONER.`
`EXHIBIT P10`	`TRUE COPY OF AMENDMENT APPLICATION I.` `A NO. 822/2023 IN O. S 14/2023` `SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.`
`EXHIBIT P11`	`TRUE COPY OF INJUNCTION APPLICATION I.` `A NO. 821/2023 IN O. S 14/2023` `SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.`
`EXHIBIT P12`	`TRUE COPY OF PROSECUTION APPLICATION` `I. A NO. 823/2023 IN O. S 14/2023` `SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.`
`EXHIBIT P13`	`TRUE COPY OF ABSTRACT PROCEEDINGS OF` `HON'BLE WAQF TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE DATED` `10.10.2023.`
`EXHIBIT P14`	`TRUE COPY OF ABSTRACT PROCEEDINGS OF` `HON'BLE WAQF TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE DATED` `11.10.2023.`
`EXHIBIT P15`	`TRUE COPY OF COUNTER FILED BY` `RESPONDENTS 6 & 7 IN I. A NO.` `821/2023.`
`EXHIBIT P16`	`TRUE COPY OF COUNTER FILED BY` `RESPONDENTS 6 & 7 IN I. A NO.` `822/2023.`
`EXHIBIT P17`	`TRUE COPY OF COUNTER FILED BY` `RESPONDENTS 6 & 7 IN I. A NO. 823/2023`
`EXHIBIT P18`	`TRUE COPY OF ABSTRACT PROCEEDINGS ON` `01.11.2023.`

Irinchayam Maithani Puthenpalli Muslim Jama-Ath v. Sajad Saher. M

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Irinchayam Maithani Puthenpalli Muslim Jama-Ath v. Sajad Saher. M

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saranya Vs Sonia

Mohammed Shahid B. Vs Jameiyath Ehyaudheen

Jaison V.D. Vs Palayoor Benyne Jos

M. Hamza Haji Vs the Kerala State Wakf Board

Swaraswathy Vs Deepthi Gangadhran

Dharmajan Vs Ramya