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

2022 Supreme(Ker) 822

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
S.V.BHATTI, BASANT BALAJI, JJ.
Elappully Erancheri Jama-Ath Palli, Represented By Its President C.Mohammed Ibrahim – Appellant
Versus
Mohammed Haneef And Others – Respondents
C.R.P. No.144 of 2011
Decided on : 29-06-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : SRI.P.JAYARAM, SRI.SARATH CHANDRAN K.B.
For the Respondent: SRI.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ, SHRI.JAMSHEED HAFIZ, adv

Point of Law: Every muslim is entitled to get a decent burial according to civil rights and graveyard under supervision of 1st defendant is a public graveyard, any muslim or any member of 1st defendant has a right to bury dead.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 15 and 25 - Wakf Act - Section 69 - Wakf Tribunal - Suit for declaration of their right and prohibitory injunction - Plaintiffs are members and beneficiaries of Elappully Eranchery Jama-ath Palli - It is a wakf represented by 1st defendant/president and 2nd defendant/secretary. When plaintiffs and 40 members of 1st defendant wakf attended a religious discourse conducted by Kerala Naduvathul Mujahideen, 1st defendant led by its president and secretary ex-communicated plaintiffs and others of Jama-ath - Tribunal after elaborately considering the rights of plaintiffs have decreed suit and revision is only an abuse of process of law and same has to be dismissed. (Para 6).

Findings of the Court: Defendant cannot obstruct the plaintiffs from offering prayers in mosque and from burying dead bodies of their relatives stating that they have been ex-communicated from 1st defendant Jama-ath since they followed Kerala Naduvathul Mujahidhin Sect - Admittedly, the 1st defendant is a wakf having an extent of 1 acre and 25 cents of property wherein the mosque building and the khabarstan are situated. The contention raised in the written statement filed by defendants 1 and 2 is that since they have changed to Kerala Naduvathul Mujahidheen and attempting to transfer the members of the 1st defendant Jama-ath their organisation they have to delink themselves from the 1st defendant and hence they are not entitled to offer prayers and buried their dead bodies. The said contention will not stand in the eye of the law because every muslim is entitled to offer prayers in any mosque or buried dead bodies in a public khabarsthan. The 1st defendant's mosque and khabarsthan being a public one, the defendants cannot obstruct the plaintiffs in offering prayers and burying the dead. The Tribunal found that the apprehension raised by the plaintiffs that they will not be allowed to offer prayers and the dead bodies of the family members will not be allowed to be buried because a law and order situation happened on 18.10.2007 in connection with the burial of the dead body of one Mohammed. The Tribunal after elaborately considering the right of the parties and the contentions raised in the written statement decreed the suit, ongoing through the evidence adduced as well as the judgment of the Tribunal.

Result: Ordered accordingly.

ORDER :

Defendants 1 and 2 in W.O.S.No.64 of 2007 on the files of the Wakf Tribunal, Ernakulam, are the revision petitioners, and the respondents 1 to 3 herein were plaintiffs 1 and 2 and 3rd defendant. The parties are referred to as they are arrayed before the Tribunal.

2. The suit was filed by the plaintiffs for declaration and injunction. The averments in the plaint, in brief, are as follows:

The plaintiffs are members and beneficiaries of Elappully Eranchery Jama-ath Palli. It is a wakf represented by the 1st defendant/president and 2nd defendant/secretary. When the plaintiffs and 40 members of the 1st defendant wakf attended a religious discourse conducted by the Kerala Naduvathul Mujahideen on 20.03.2007, the 1st defendant led by its president and secretary ex-communicated the plaintiffs and others of the Jama-ath. They imposed a ban on the members of the Jama-ath from participating in the marriage and their ceremonies to be held in the houses of the plaintiffs and others. They were also not allowed to bury the dead bodies of the plaintiffs, others and their family members. In connection with the burial of the dead body of one Mohammed, on 18.10.2007, there was a law and order problem and the RDO, Palakkad, Tahsildar, Circle Inspector and Sub Inspector of Police came to the plaint schedule property and mediated the matter and the dead body was buried. Thereafter a complaint was filed before the RDO for a permanent solution to the matter. On 03.11.2007, the RDO convened a joint meeting and took a decision directing the Jama-ath committee not to obstruct the burial of dead bodies of Mujahideen Sect, till they acquire an alternative burial ground of their own. Plaintiffs have no other Jama ath or burial ground. Plaintiffs apprehend that the defendants will obstruct the burial of dead bodies, hence the suit was filed for declaration of their right and prohibitory injunction.

3. Defendants 1 and 2 filed a joint written statement. The 1st defendant wakf is administered by the committee and the beneficiaries are the followers of Allahu Sunnathu Val Jama-ath. Plaintiffs were members of the 1st defendant Jama-ath and followers of Allahu Sunnath Val Jama-ath. Thereafter they changed to Kerala Naduvathul Mujahideen and attempted to transform the members of the 1st defendant Jama-ath into that organization. Kerala Naduvathul Mujahideen has got several religious institutions and wakf properties including mosque, madrasa, khabarsthan etc., of their own. They have got ample institutions and khabarstan to accommodate their believers and bury their dead bodies. Plaintiffs and their organisations have no legal right to bury the dead bodies in the khabarsthan of the 1st defendant Jama-ath. As per the agreement dated 03.11.2007, plaintiffs have waived their claim on the 1st defendant organization and its properties, hence prayed for dismissal of the suit.

4. The Tribunal raised 4 issues and based on Exts.A1 to A3 and the oral evidence of PWs 1 and 2 decreed the suit and it was declared that the plaintiffs and similarly situated persons have the right to prayers of the defendant mosque and to bury the dead bodies of the family members in the 1st defendant Jama-ath. The 1st defendant and their men were permanently restrained from obstructing the plaintiffs and similarly situated persons from conducting prayers in the mosque and burying the dead bodies of the family members of the khabarstan in the plaint scheduled property. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree this revision is filed by the defendants 1 and 2.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner Sri.P.Jayaram submits that the religious beliefs and practices of Allahu Sunnath Val Jama-ath and Kerala Naduvathul Mujahideen are different in many ways. The impugned judgment and decree rendered by the Wakf Tribunal for two different fractions offering prayers and conducting funerals in the same mosque and graveyard will disturb the public order, morality and health of the citizens of the muslim

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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