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 28TH OCTOBER 2010 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1932 CRP.No. 560 of 2010 ------------------------ OS.60/2007 of WAKF TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): PLAINTIFF -------------------------------------- KUNHALI, S/O.RAYINKUTTY HAJI, THANDUPARAKKAL, KARULAI AMSOM AND DESOM, NILAMBUR TALUK, PIN-679 329. BY ADV. SRI.R.RAMADAS RESPONDENT(S): DEFENDANTS ----------------------------------- 1. SHUKKOOL ISLAM MADRASSA CHETTIYIL, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY THONDIYIL ABOOBACKER, S/O.UNNI HASSAN, KARULAI AMSOM DESOM, NILAMBUR TALUK, PIN-679 329. 2. SHUKKOOL ISLAM MADRASSA CHETTIYIL, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT MANJAN MUHAMMED KUNHI KURIKKAL, S/O.HASSAN, KARULAYI AMSOM DESOM, NILAMBUR TALUK, PIN-679 329. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/10/2010, A/W CRP.561/10,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & P. S. GOPINATHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ C. R. P. Nos.560 & 561 of 2010 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 28th day of October, 2010 ORDER Pius C. Kuriakose, J Under challenge in these revision petitions are the common judgment passed by the Wakf Tribunal, Kozhikode in O.S.60/07 and O.S.65/07. Having gone through the judgment and having heard the submissions of Sri.R.Ramadas, the learned counsel for the revision petitioners and also those of Sri.K.M.Firoz, the learned counsel for the contesting respondents, we feel that the issue is covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ramesh Gobindram v. Sugra Humayun Mirza Wakf (2010(3) KLT 862 (SC). It is admitted by C. R. P. Nos.560 & 561 of 2010 -2- both sides that the properties in question is Wakf property. Sri.K.M.Firoz submitted that one of the disputes involved in the suits is administration of the Wakf by a Mutawalli. Our attention was drawn by Sri.Firoz to Section 19 who submitted that when issue pertains to administration of Wakf properties by the Mutawalli suits may be maintainable before the Wakf Tribunal. We notice that in this particular case, the Mutawalliship i.e. the identity of the respondents as the Mutawalli of the Wakf properties in question is also not in dispute. That being so, we strongly feel that the suits are not maintainable. Anyway, we do not want to decide the issue finally. We set aside the judgment and decree under revision and remand the suits back to the Wakf Tribunal, Kozhikode. C. R. P. Nos.560 & 561 of 2010 -3- That Tribunal is directed to hear both sides and take a decision regarding the maintainability of the suits in the context of the pronouncement of the Supreme Court judgment in Ramesh Gobindram v. Sugra Humayun Mirza Wakf (2010 (3) KLT 862 (SC). Parties will appear before the Wakf Tribunal, Kozhikode on 22/11/10. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE P. S. GOPINATHAN JUDGE kns/-