Back
M. M. SUNDRESH, S. V. BHATTI
S. V. Cheriyakoya Thangal – Appellant
Versus
S. V. P. Pookoya – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Leave granted.
2. This case has got a chequered history. The lis which started in the year 1987 in the form of a Civil Suit O.S. No.5/1987 on the file of Munsif Court, Androth, still continues in one form or another.
3. After the completion of the earlier round of litigation, the present lis was started at the instance of the appellant, duly followed by the respondents. Before the Waqf Board, both the parties claimed their respective rights to Mutawalliship and Sheikhship. By an elaborate order the Waqf Board held in favour of the appellant declaring him as a Mutawalli.
4. Being aggrieved, respondents filed an application by invoking Section 83 of the Waqf Act, 1995 before the Waqf Tribunal.
5. The Waqf Tribunal, after affording opportunities to both the sides, inter alia, held that there is no perversity in the decision rendered by the Waqf Board.
6. A plea was also taken both before the Waqf Board and the Waqf Tribunal, on the question of jurisdiction. It was contended by the respondents that it is the Waqf Tribunal which has got the original jurisdiction to decide the issue pertaining to Mutawalliship and, therefore, the Waqf Board did not have the jurisdiction.
7. On a revi
The Waqf Board has jurisdiction over Mutawalliship disputes, while the Waqf Tribunal serves as an adjudicating authority.
The Waqf Board holds original jurisdiction over mutawalli appointments, while the Tribunal's role is appellate, as established by the Waqf Act.
The Waqf Tribunal has exclusive jurisdiction over disputes related to Waqf properties, and High Courts should not entertain such matters directly.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the powers and limitations of the Waqf Tribunal under the Waqf Act, 1995, and the entitlement of male lineal descendants to m....
The court emphasized the importance of adhering to the principles of natural justice and the applicability of Section 83(2) of The Waqf Act, 1995 in determining the maintainability of the writ petiti....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the lack of clear guidelines for the appointment of Mutawalli, leading to biased and arbitrary decisions by the Wakf Board, and the intervention of....
The Waqf Board must adhere to the rules of succession as per the waqf deed, reinforcing the principle of governance according to established customs and the intent of the waqif.
Civil Courts retain jurisdiction over the spiritual office of Sajjadanashin despite statutory considerations under the Waqf Act, emphasizing the distinct nature of spiritual versus administrative rol....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
