The main legal point established in the judgment is that the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is expressly barred under Sec.85 of the Wakf Act, and the availability of alternative remedies precludes the maintainability of the Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(Civil Revision Petition, filed under Sec.115 against the Judgment and Decree dated 12.10.2004 passed by the Principal District Munsif, Tenkasi in O.S.No.881 of 2004, as stated therein.)

This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the Judgment and Decree dated 12.10.2004 passed by the Principal District Munsif, Tenkasi in O.S.No.881 of 2004, dismissing the Suit in O.S.No.881 of 2004 as barred under Sec.85 of the Wakf Act. The Plaintiffs are the Revision Petitioners.

2. O.S.No.881 of 2004:-

The Plaintiffs have filed the Suit, representing Safi Sect of Muslims residing in Street Nos.1 to 15, of Rahmaniapuram, Kadayanallur, Case of the Plaintiffs is that the Plaintiffs and the Safi Sect of Muslims residing in Rahmaniapuram Street, Kadayanallur are burying their deads only in Kabersthan (Mayyawadi) situated nearby Rahmaniapuram Naina Mohammed Pallivasal. The Plaintiffs have claimed their right through Agreement dated 19.09.1992 executed by the Secretary of Naina Mohammed Pallivasal (hereinafter referred to as "Suit Pallivasal"). According to the Plaintiffs, for having the right of burying their deads, they have paid a sum of Rs.22,000/- for the development of Mayyawadi in the year 1992. In the Plaint, the suit property is described as the Wakf Property. The Defendants are in management of the Pallivasal and the Mayyawadi. The First Defendant – Mohideen Kani is the Muthavalli; the Second Defendant is the Secretary of the Suit Pallivasal. Case of the Plaintiffs is that the suit Pallivasal and Mayyawadi are for religious purposes. The Plaintiffs and Residents of Street Nos.1 to 15 of Rahmaniapuram Street, Kadayanallur are entitled to bury their deads in the Mayyawadi of the suit Pallivasal. There has been previous litigation in O.S.No.305 of 1988. The Defendants are claiming advantage of the said Decree and denying their lawful rights of the Plaintiffs in burying their deads. The Defendants have no right to collect excessive amount for burying the deads. As per the Holy Kuran, the burial of the Muslim cannot be denied. Alleging that on the strength of Decree in O.S.No.305 of 1988, the Defendants are trying to interfere with the right of Safi Sect of Muslims, the Plaintiffs have filed the suit for -

(i) declaration that the Plaintiff and other Safi Sect Muslims who are residing in Street Nos.1 to 15 of Rahmaniapuram Street, Kadayanallur are entitled to bury their deads in Mayyawadi of Rahmaniapuram Naina Mohammed Pallivasal ;

(ii) for Permanent Injunction, restraining the Defendants from burying the deads of Safi Sect of Muslims in the Mayyawadi and for other reliefs.

3. I.A.No.1389 of 2005:-

This Application has been filed for Temporary Injunction in which, the Plaintiffs have obtained Interim Injunction. The Defendants have filed elaborate counter Statement raising serious objection as to the maintainability of the Suit in the Civil Court. According to the Defendants / Respondents, the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is expressly barred under Sec.85 of the Wakf Act. The Defendants have raised the plea that the dispute relates to Wakf Property and only the Tribunal constituted under Sec.83 of the Wakf Act has the power to decide the question. It is further contended that D-1 being the Muthavalli and D-2 being the Secretary of Pallivasal, they are subject to the Rule of Wakf Board and the suit filed in their individual capacity is not maintainable. According to the Defendants, the property in S.No.241-B and 241-C and 4.24 acres was purchased for putting up Pallivasal and Mayyawadi by the Sale Deed dated 17.08.2004. Since the space was insufficient, money was raised from the residents of Street Nos.1 to 3 of Rahmaniapuram Street, Kadayanallur and Peer Mohammed Thaika Street. Further, for raising money, the Pallivasal has constructed shops which had been let out and coconut grow has been raised for raising more funds and that property recognised as the Wakf property by the Wakf Board. In the petition before the Wakf Board in