IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN THURSDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 8TH ASWINA 1932 CRP.No. 219 of 2007(C) --------------------------- OS.46/2005 of WAKF TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): DEFENDANTS 1,2,5 TO 9: ------------------------------------------------------- 1. MRS. THITHEEBI, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, W/O. LATE M.T.MOIDEENKOYA, C/O.COSMOS WOOD INDUSTRIES, KUNDUNGAL, P.O. KALLAI,NAGARAM AMSOM, DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. 2. ALIKOYA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, S/O. M.T.MOIDEENKOYA, -DO-. 3. SAKKEER, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O. M.T.MOIDEENKOYA, -DO-. 4. MAJEED (CORRECT NAME IS M.T.SAFARUDEEN), AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. M.T.MOIDEENKOYA -DO-. 5. SAINABA, AGED 38 YEARS, D/O. M.T.MOIDEENKOYA -DO-. 6. FATHIMA, AGED 35 YEARS, D/O. M.T.MOIDEENKOYA -DO-. 7. FOUSIYA, AGED 31 YEARS, D/O.M.T.MOIDEENKOYA, -DO-. BY ADV. SRI.AVM.SALAHUDIN RESPONDENT(S): PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANTS 3 AND 4: ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. M.S.IMBICHIPATHUMABI ALIAS BEEVI, AGED 72 YEARS, D/O. AHAMED KOYA, MASRANGINTAKAM, DOOR NO.15/1327, KUNDUNGAL P.O., KALLAI, CALICUT-3, NAGARAM AMSOM, DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. CRP 219/07 -2- 2. SIDDIQUE, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.M.T.MOIDEENKOYA, C/O. COSMOS WOOD INDUSTRIES, KUNDUNGAL, P.O. KALLAI, NAGARAM AMSOM, DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. 3. MUSTHAFA, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.M.T.MOIDEENKOYA -DO-. ADV. SRI.R.SUDHISH FOR R3 SMT.M.MANJU FOR R3 SRI.K.M.FIROZ FOR R1 THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/09/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & P. S. GOPINATHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ C. R. P. No.219 of 2007 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 30th day of September, 2010 ORDER Pius C. Kuriakose, J Under challenge in this revision is the judgment and decree passed by the Wakf Tribunal ordering eviction of the petitioners from the building in question. According to us, the issue is covered directly by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ramesh Gobindram v. Sugra Humayun Mirza Wakf (2010(3) KLT 862 (SC). We hold that the Wakf Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to try and dispose of the suit in question. In that view of the matter by setting aside the judgment and decree under challenge, we allow the revision and C. R. P. No.219 of 2007 -2- dismiss the suit as withdrawn. Plaintiffs/ respondents are given liberty to approach the competent court within a period of six weeks from today. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE P. S. GOPINATHAN JUDGE kns/-