SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(Ker) 850

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JJ.
Mercy Baby represented by Her Power of Attorney Holder & Husband Jose Baby - Petitioner
Versus
Kerala State Waqf Board, represented by its Chief Executive Officer & Another - Respondents
WP(C) No. 15451 of 2017 (F)
Decided On : 31-07-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:B. Ramachandran, Advocate.
For the Respondents:K. Shibili Naha, SC, Kerala State Wakf Board, P.A. Abdul Jabbar, Advocate.

Headnote:Wakf Act 1995, Sections 54, 25 and 83 - Eviction order passed by Chief Executive Officer of Wakf Board - Eviction command cannot be challenged under Article 226 if the - Remedy of affected is to tactic the Wakf Tribunal by filing an innovative application.

JUDGMENT :

Anil K. Narendran, J.

1. The petitioner, who is a tenant in occupation of two shop rooms bearing Door Nos.C.C.VI/939 (New No.V/2257) and C.C. VI/940 (New No.V/2258) situated at Bazar Road, Mattanchery, owned by M/s.Abdul Sathar Haji Moosa Sait Dharmastapanam, represented by its Managing Trustee, is before this Court in this writ petition seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P12 order dated 20.04.2017 of the Chief Executive Officer of the Kerala State Waqf Board, the first respondent herein, issued in exercise of its powers under Section 54 read with Section 25 of the Waqf Act, 1995. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the Waqf Board to participate in Ext.P10 suit, i.e., O.S.No.47 of 2017 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Kochi, since the Board has already subjected itself to the jurisdiction of the said court, and not to evict her till the said suit reaches a final conclusion.

2. On 05.05.2017, this Court issued notice on admission in the writ petition and it was ordered that Ext.P12 order shall be kept in abeyance till 23.05.2017. The said interim order was extended from time to time and the same is still in force.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the second respondent opposing the reliefs sought for in the writ petition. The said counter affidavit is sworn to by Sri. Moosa Abdul Sathar Sait, who is stated to be present Muthavally of M/s.Abdul Sathar Haji Moosa Sait Dharmastapanam. The petitioner has also filed various interlocutory applications, producing therewith certain additional documents.

4. Heard arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala State Waqf Board and also learned counsel for the second respondent.

5. Admittedly, the petitioner is in occupation of the shop rooms in question on the strength of Exts.P1 and P2 lease agreements dated 31.10.2015. The lessor in Exts.P1 and P2 lease agreements is M/s.Abdul Sathar Haji Moosa Sait Dharmastapanam, having its office at Arangath Road, Pulleppady, Kochi, represented by its Managing Trustee Sri.Adam Aboobacker Sait, who is arrayed as the second respondent in this writ petition.

6. As per the recitals of Exts.P1 and P2 lease agreements, the lessor, namely, M/s.Abdul Sathar Haji Moosa Sait Dharmastapanam is the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of A.S.H.M.S. Trust building called 'Sathar Building' having two floors, situated at Mattanchery, and the shop rooms in question are on the ground floor of the said building. The period of occupancy specified in Exts.P1 and P2 lease agreements is 11 months from 01.10.2015 to 31.08.2016 and the lessee, the petitioner herein, has agreed to handover possession of the premises to the lessor at the end of the lease. The monthly rent fixed in Exts.P1 and P2 lease agreements is Rs.1820/- and Rs.2425/- respectively. As per clause 5(f) of the said lease agreements, the lessor have the right to evict the lessee by invoking the provisions of Section 54 of the Waqf Act, 1995. Clause 5(f) of Exts.P1 and P2 lease agreements reads thus;

“5(f) That the Lessee shall permit the Lessor and their agents to enter the said premises in their occupation for inspection, at all reasonable times. Being a Waqf the Lessee (sic: Lessor) shall have the right to evict the Lessee by evoking (sic: invoking) Section 54 of the Waqf Act, 1995.”

7. As discernible from Ext.P12 order dated 20.4.2017, M/s.Abdul Sathar Haji Moosa Sait Dharmastapanam is a waqf registered with the Waqf Board with registration No.3330/RA, which is under the superintendence of the Waqf Board, as per the provisions under the Waqf Act. The Waqf Board received a complaint that the petitioner herein is unauthorisedly and illegally occupying the shop rooms in question, which are owned by the said waqf, though the period of tenancy has already expired, and a lawyer notice dated 09.11.2016 has also been issued terminating the tenancy and demanding vacant possession of the shop rooms. Based on the said com


























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top