IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 28TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 6TH ASWINA 1932 CRP.No. 451 of 2010() --------------------- OS.63/2008 of WAKF TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... REVN. PETITIONERs PETITIONERS IN I.A. PLAINTIFFS IN SUIT: --------------------- 1. PUTHAN PEEDIKA PALLI PARIPALANA COMMITTEE, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, T.P.KUNHIKOYAMUTTY,S/O.MUHAMMED ALIAS BAVUTTY HAJI RESIDING AT PARAPPANANGADI, TIRURANGADI TALUK. 2. T.P.KUNHIKOYAMUTTY, SECRETARY OF POUTHAN PEEDIKA PALLI PARIPALANA COMMITTEE, S/O.MUHAMMED ALIAS BAVUTTY HAJI, RESIDING AT PARAPPANANGADI AMSOM DESOM OF TIRURANGADI TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.S.V.BALAKRISHNA IYER, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN SRI.R.SURAJ KUMAR SMT.GEETHA P.MENON SRI.P.M.NEELAKANDAN RESPONDENT(S) - RESPONDENT IN I.A. DEFENDANT NO.1 IN SUIT: --------------- A.P.MUHAMMEDKUTTY, S/O.ASAMUTTAY MARAKKAR, RESIDING AT ERAMAKKARA VEETTIL PUTHIYAKATHU HOUSE, NADUVA AMSOM AND DESOM, TIRURANGADI TALUK MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676306 ADV. SRI.A.A.ABUL HASSAN SRI.B.KRISHNAN SRI.R.PARTHASARATHY THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. ------------------------ C.R.P.No. 451 OF 2010 ------------------------ Dated this the 28th day of September, 2010 O R D E R Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Under challenge in this revision under Section 83(9) of the Wakf Act filed by the plaintiffs in O.S. No.63/2008 of the Wakf Tribunal, Kozhikode is the order passed by the Tribunal in I.A. No.1133/2008. Under the impugned order, the learned Tribunal has dismissed I.A.No.1133/2008, which was an application for temporary injunction filed by the plaintiffs/petitioners. It is conceded at the Bar by the learned counsel appearing for the parties Sri.P.B.Krishnan, Sri.B.Krishnan and Sri.A.A.Abul Hassan, learned Standing Counsel for the Wakf Board that the core issue, which arises for decision in the suit, is the Muthavalliship over the Wakf in question. We notice the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ramesh Gobindram v. Sugra Humayun Mirza Wakf (2010 (3) KLT 862 (SC). We find that going by the ratio of the above decision, the dispute over the Muthavalliship of a Wakf cannot be decided by the Wakf Tribunal and can be decided by the CRP.No.451/2010 2 competent Civil Court as such issue will not come under the jurisdiction of the Wakf Tribunal. Under the above circumstances, we dispose of this civil revision petition giving liberty to the petitioners to approach the Wakf Tribunal by appropriate application either to withdraw from the suit or for orders for return of the suit for presentation before the competent civil court. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE dpk