IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 14TH MARCH 2011 / 23RD PHALGUNA 1932 RP.No. 165 of 2011() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN CRP.1032/2006 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S) (1ST RESPONDENT IN CRP): ---------------------- AREEPATTA MANNIL MUHAMMED ALI, S/O CHERIYA KUTTIASSAN HAJI, KODIYATHOOR AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): REV.PETITIONERS 1&2 AND R2 TO R7 IN CRP) ------------------------------------------------------- 1. BULKEES, D/O KALIKKOTTU USMAN, KALATHINGAL HOUSE, CHENNAMANGALORE, MUKKOM, KOZHIKODE. 2. HARIS, S/O KALIKKOTTU USMAN, KALATHINGAL HOUSE, CHENNAMANGALORE, MUKKOM, KOZHIKODE. 3. KERALA WAKF BOARD, REP. BY SECRETARY ABOOTTY, S/O ABOOBACKER HAJI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. VELAYUDHAN NAIR, S/O MANNANKAL CHEROOTTY AMMA, PANNIKKODE DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. 5. PATHUMMA, D/O AREEPATTAMANNIL USSANKUTTY, KALATHINGAL HOUSE, CHENNAMANGALORE, MUKKOM, KOZHIKODE. 6. JAMEELA, D/O AREEPATTAMANNIL USSANKUTTY, KALATHINGAL HOUSE, CHENNAMANGALORE, MUKKOM, KOZHIKODE. 7. AREEPATTAMANNIL AMINA ABOOBACKER, D/O USSANKUTTY, CHENNAMANGALORE, MUKKOM, KOZHIKODE. 8. PALLIKUNNU VEETTIL SAROJINI, W/O KRISHNANKUTTY, VETTATHUR, CHELIYAPPURAM, ERANAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. SRI.A.A.ABDUL HASAN ( SC FOR WAKF BOARAD) SRI.P.BKRISHNAN THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/03/2011, ALONG WITH RP NO. 166 OF 2011 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------ R.P.Nos.165 & 166 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 14th day of March, 2011 O R D E R Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Having considered the submissions addressed before us by by Sri.T.Sethumadhavan, learned counsel for the review petitioners, Sri.A.A.Abul Hassan, learned standing counsel for the Wakf Board and also Sri.P.B.Krishnan, learned counsel appearing for the party respondents, we feel that there is ground for recalling our common judgment. We find that this was a suit where one of the issues, which the court below and the Tribunal enquired into, was whether the property involved was Wakf property or not. Nobody contended before the Court below that the issue did not arise before the Wakf Tribunal. It is not open to the respondents now to bank upon the provisos to Section 6 of the Wakf Act and contend that the issue did not arise. We recall our judgment dated 15/12/2010 and post the CRPs for hearing before the Bench which is presently dealing RP.Nos.165 & 166/2011 2 with similar matters as per the roster. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE dpk