IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2010 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1932 CRP.No. 1060 of 2005() ---------------------------- OS.134/2001 of WAKF TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE ................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): PLAINTIFFS. ----------------------------------------- 1. VALIYA PEEDIAKAKKAL KUNHAMU, S/O.KUHAMMAD, THRIKKULAM AMSOM AND DESOM, THIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. NEELADICHI PARAMBAN MOHAMMED, S/O. MOIDEEN, DO. DO. 3. PANAMTHODIKA KUNHIMOIDEEN, S/O.ASSAN, DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.R.RAMADAS RESPONDENT(S): DEFENDANTS. ------------------------------------- 1. MUNEERUAL ISLAM SANGHAM, PANTHARARGADI ATHANIKKAL, THIRURANGADI TALUK. MALAPPURAM DIST. A SOCIETY REGD. UNDER THE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, HAVING ITS OFFICE SITUATED AT THRIKKULAM AMSOM & DESOM, TIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DIST/ AND REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT. 2. M.C.HASSAN KUTTY, PREIDENT OF MUNEERAL ISLAM SANGHAM, S/O.KOYAKUTTY, THRIKKULAM AMSOM AND DESOM, TIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DIST. 3. MUNEERUL ISLAM SANGHAM, PANTHARANGADI, ATHANIKKAL, TIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. P.P.ABOOBACKER, S/O.KUNHIMUTTY, SECRETARY OF MUNEERUL ISLAMD SANGHOM, THRIKKULAM AMSOM AND DESOM, TIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs/ PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. ----------------------------------- C.R.P.No.1060 OF 2005 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2010 O R D E R ~~~~~~~ P.S.Gopinathan, J. The plaintiffs in O.S.134/2001 on the file of the Wakf Tribunal, Kozhikode, are the revision petitioners. Assailing the decree dismissing the suit, this revision petition was filed. Suit is one for declaration and injunction. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the matter in dispute is covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in Ramesh Gobindram v. Sugra Humayun Mirza Wakf [2010(3) KLT 862] and hence the suit is not maintainable before the Wakf Tribunal. The above submission of the learned counsel is recorded. Accordingly, C.R.P. is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to move the appropriate court for the reliefs sought in the plaint, if so chosen. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) (P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE) ps