IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 22ND NOVEMBER 2010 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA 1932 CRP.No. 685 of 2006() ------------------------------- IN & WOS.20/2005 IN WOA.5/2005 of WAKF TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): -------------------------------- TOWN JUMA MASJID, KALADY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SHAJAHAN, S/O.KASSIM, KALADY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY SRI.T.KRISHNAN UNNI, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENT(S): APPLICANT/PETITIONER -------------------------------------------------------------- K.A.STEPHEN, S/O.ANTONY, KUREYATHU VEETTIL, CHALAMATTOM VILLAGE, OKKAL KARA, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VENUGOPALAN THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- CRP NO.685 OF 2006 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd November, 2010 ORDER Pius C.Kuriakose, J. This revision is directed against the common judgment in W.O.S.No.20/2005 and W.O.A.No.5/2005 on the files of the Wakf Tribunal, Ernakulam. Relying on the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Ramesh Gobindram v Sugra Humayur Mirza Wakf (2010(3) KLT 862 (SC), another Division Bench of this Court, in which one among Pius C.Kuriakose (J) was a member, has set aside the judgment in O.S.No.20 of 2005 which had been impugned separately in CRP No.689 of 2006. It was found that a competent civil court alone has the jurisdiction to entertain W.O.S.No.20 of 2005 in view of the Supreme Court Judgment. As far as the present case is concerned, it is not disputed that it is the Wakf Tribunal which has the jurisdiction to consider W.O.A.No.5/2005. But, at the same time we notice that it was common CRP No.685 OF 2006 2 evidence, that was adduced in both the O.S. and O.A. and it was a common judgment which was rendered by the learned Tribunal. Now that both the O.S. and the O.A. have become liable to be separated, we feel that it is proper that the parties are permitted to adduce further evidence, if any and the Wakf Tribunal is directed to take a fresh decision. Under the above circumstances, we set aside the judgment impugned in this CRP and remit W.O.A.No.5/2005 to the Wakf Tribunal, Ernakulam to take a fresh decision. The Tribunal will permit both sides to adduce evidence, if they so desire. Take decision on the basis of evidence already available on record and further evidence to be adduced by the parties before court. Parties will appear before the Wakf Tribunal, Ernakulam on 14.12.2010. The Tribunal will expedite matters and ensure that fresh decision is taken at the earliest. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE css/