Kerala High Court
A.M.Bava Pilla vs Myloor Jama-Ath Mosque on 29 May, 2018
Author: K.Harilal
Bench: K.Harilal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.HARILAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BABU
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 18TH JYAISHTA, 1940
OP (WAKF).No. 24 of 2018
------------------------
I.A.270/2018 IN O.S.28/2018 OF WAKF TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM.
.......
PETITIONER(S)/PLAINTIFFS:
-------------------------
1. A.M.BAVA PILLA, AGED 62 YEARS,
S/O.MOHAMMED BAKE, AMALIPURATH HOUSE,
MYLOOR KARA, VARAPETTY,
PALLARIMANGALAM.P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM.
2. A.M. ABDUL KAREEM, AGED 60 YEARS,
S/O.MOHAMMED BAKE, AMALIPURATH HOUSE,
MYLOOR KARA, VARAPETTY,
PALLARIMANGALAM.P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM.
BY ADV.SRI.P.V.BABY
RESPONDENT(S)/DEFENDANTS:
------------------------
1. MYLOOR JAMA-ATH MOSQUE, MYLOORE KARA,
VARAPPETTY VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MUTHAVALLY,
A.M. ABDUL KHADER, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
S/O.MOHAMMED BAKE, AMALIPURATH HOUSE,
MYLOOR KARA, VARAPETTY VILLAGE,
PALLARIMANGALAM.P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM - 686 691.
2. ABRAR JUMA MASJID, MYLOOR KARA,
VARAPETTY VILLAGE, PALLARIMANGALAM.P.O.,
KOTHAMANGALAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
P.K. SAYED MOHAMMED, AGED 62 YEARS,
S/O.KUNJALLU, PADIKKAMATTOM HOUSE,
MYLOOR KARA, VARAPETTY VILLAGE,
PALLARIMANGALAM.P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM - 686 691.
3. P.K. SAYED MOHAMMED, AGED 62 YEARS,
S/O.KUNJALLU, PADIKKAMATTOM HOUSE,
MYLOOR KARA, VARAPETTY VILLAGE,
PALLRIMANGALAM.P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM,
THE SECRETARY OF ABRAR JUMA MASIJID,
PALLARIMANGALAM.P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM - 686 691.
OP (WAKF).No. 24 of 2018
------------------------
4. K.M. SHAMSUDEEN, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
S/O.ABDU KUNJU, KODAKKATTU HOUSE,
MYLOOR KARA, VARAPETTY VILLAGE,
PALLARIMANGALAM.P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM,
PRESIDENT OF ABRAR JUMA MASJID,
PALLARIMANGALAM.P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM - 686 691.
5. M.K. SHAKEER, AGED 42 YEARS,
S/O.MYTHEEN PILLA, MACKANATTU HOUSE,
MYLOOR KARA, VARAPETTY VILLAGE,
PALLARIMANGALAM.P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM - 686 691.
6. KERALA STATE WAKF BOARD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
KALOOR, KOCHI - 682 017.
R6 BY SRI.T.P.SAJID, SC
THIS OP (WAKF) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-06-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
mbr/
OP (WAKF).No. 24 of 2018
------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
---------------------
EXHIBIT P1 : A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE W.O.S.NO.28/2018
DATED 29.5.2018 FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE WAKF TRIBUNAL,
ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT P2 : A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE I.S.NO.270/2018
DATED 30.5.2018 ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT FILED
BEFORE THE HON'BLE WAKF TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT P3 : A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER SHEET IN
I.S.NO.270/2018 ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION
DATED 30.5.2018.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL
---------------------
/TRUE COPY/
P.S.TO JUDGE
mbr/
08.06.2018.
K.HARILAL & A.M.BABU, JJ.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
O.P.(WT).24 of 2018
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated : 8th June, 2018
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
JUDGMENT
Harilal, J
1.Petitioners are the plaintiffs and the respondents are the defendants in O.S.28/2018 filed by the plaintiff before the Waqf Tribunal, Ernakulam. The aforesaid OS was filed seeking permanent injunction restraining respondents 2 to 5 and their men and agents from making any construction in the plaint schedule property and/or from demolishing any buildings in the plaint schedule property or from causing any alteration to or from tampering with any of the buildings therein or changing the nature or character of the buildings in the plaint schedule property. Along with the aforesaid Original Petition, the petitioners have filed Ext.P2 interlocutory application seeking a temporary injunction for the same. After the institution of the suit along with the aforesaid IA, the Original Suit was posted before the bench on 1.6.2018 for the consideration of the IA. But the tribunal ordered notice and posted the case to OP(WT).24/18 2 13.6.2018 without considering the merits of the case put forward in the IA seeking an urgent relief. This is the grievance projected in the Original Petition.
2.The petitioners apprehend that the defendants would demolish the existing building in the petition schedule property and make new constructions at any time during the pendency of the I.A. According to the petitioners, the delay in the disposal of the IA would give an opportunity to the defendants to make the interim relief infructuous. In the above circumstances, petitioners filed this Original Petition and sought for a direction to the tribunal to consider and dispose of the aforesaid IA within a specified time.
3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned standing counsel for the 6th respondent.
4.The Suit is for permanent injunction and the IA was filed seeking an urgent relief on the basis of OP(WT).24/18 3 an apprehension that the defendants may demolish the existing building and construct a new building in that place. The nature of the relief sought for in the I.A would show the urgency of the matter. But, the tribunal has posted the case to 13.6.2018 for considering the question whether the petitioners are entitled to get a temporary injunction after hearing the defendants also. Certainly delay will defeat the ends of justice. Therefore, having regard to the apprehension expressed in the pleadings, the tribunal is directed to consider and dispose of IA.270/2018 in W.O.S.28/2018 on or before 20.6.2018.
5.The parties are directed to maintain status quo as on the date of inspection of the advocate commissioner, till the disposal of the IA.
Sd/-
K.HARILAL Judge sd/-
A.M.BABU Judge Mrcs/8.6.