2003 Supreme(Mad) 788
N.V.BALASUBRAMANIAN, T.V.MASILAMANI
A. M. Shamsudeen – Appellant
Versus
A. M. Mohamed Salihu and others – Respondent
Advocates:
M/s.S.F.Mohamed Yousuf and A.B.Fathimasulthana, for Appellant in A.S.No.972 of 2001.
E.Ravichandran, for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 in A.S.No.972 of 2001.
V.Raghavachari, for Respondent No.5 in A.S.No.972 of 2001.
M/s.A.B.Fathima Sulthana, for Appellant in A.S.No.1020 of 2001.
V.Venkatasamy, for Respondent Nos.2 and 7 in A.S.No.1020 of 2001.
V.Selvaraj, for Appellant in A.S.No.1021 of 2001.
E.Ravichandran, for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 in A.S.No.1021 of 2001.
C.Thirumaran, for Respondent Nos.5, 6, 8 and 9 in A.S.No.1021 of 2001.
R.N.Amarnath, for Respondent No.13 in A.S.No.1021 of 2001.
V.Venkatasamy, for Respondent Nos.33 and 28 in A.S.No.1021 of 2001.
S.Y.Masood, for Respondent No.12 in A.S.No.1021 of 2001.
N.Subramani, for Respondent Nos.18 and 19 in A.S.No.1021 of 2001.
R.Subramanian, for Respondent No.23 in A.S.No.1021 of 2001.
M/s.S.F.Mohamed Yousuf and Fathima Sulthana, for Respondent Nos.20 and 39 in A.S.No.1021 of 2001.
AR.L.Sundaresan, for Respondent No.7 in A.S.No.1021 of 2001.
V.M.Rajavelu, for Respondent No.11 in A.S.No.1021 of 2001.
M/s.V.M.Rajavelu, C.Thirumaran and V.R.Thangavelu, for Appellant in A.S.No.1022 of 2001.
R.Subramanian, for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 in A.S.No.1022 of 2001.
S.Y.Masood, for Respondent No.4 in A.S.No.1022 of 2001.
R.N.Amarnath, for Respondent No.5 in A.S.No.1022 of 2001.
M/s.V.K.Vijayaragavan and R.Rajaramani, for Appellant in A.S.No.1084 of 2001.
C.Thirumaran, for Respondent Nos.4 and 6 in A.S.No.1084 of 2001.
R.N.Amarnath, for Appellant in A.S.No.1116 of 2001.
V.M.Rajavelu, for Respondent No.4 in A.S.No.1116 of 2001.
M/s.S.Y.Masood, for Respondent No.5 in A.S.No.1116 of 2001.
R.Subramanian, for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 in A.S.No.1116 of 2001.
M/s.V.Raghavachari, V.Srimathi and V.Lakshminarayanan, for Appellant in A.S.No.1139 of 2001:
M/s.S.Y.Masood, for Appellant in A.S.No.1140 of 2001.
V.M.Rajavelu, for Respondent No.4 in A.S.No.1140 of 2001.
M/s.P.N.Amarnath and N.Subramani, for Respondent No.5 in A.S.No.1140 of 2001.
R.Subramanian, for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 in A.S.No.1140 of 2001.
B.Thanikachalam, for N.Subramani, for Appellant in A.S.Nos.536 and 537 of 2002.
V.Selvaraj, for Respondent No.4 in A.S.Nos.536 and 537 of 2002.
M/s.S.F.Mohammed Yousif and A.S.Fathima Sulthana, for Respondent No.8 in A.S.Nos.536 and 537 of 2002.
T.R.Mani, Senior Counsel for P.Balasubramani, for Petitioner in C.R.P.No.3932 of 2001.
G.Ravishankar, for Respondent in C.R.P.No.3932 of 2001.
M/s.Hema Sampath and R.Subramanian, for Petitioner in C.R.P. NPD. No.508 of 2003.
C.Thirumaran, for Respondents in C.R.P. NPD. No.508 of 2003.
JUDGMENT
N.V.Balasubramanian, J.: There are ten appeals and two civil revision petitions arising out of a common order passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Thanjavur in O.S. No.6 of 1970 dated 25.9.2001 wherein learned Scheme Judge (Principal District Judge, Thanjavur) appointed certain trustees, both hereditary and non-hereditary, for the administration of a wakf, that is, M.K.N. Madarasa, Adirampattinam. The appeals and civil revision petitions have been preferred by the persons who were not selected by the learned Scheme Judge, and we find it almost a common feature that the unsuccessful candidates who were not selected approach this Court against the order of selection at every selection made and the litigation goes on endlessly. It is painful to note that serious allegations and counter allegations have been made by one party against the other and the Courts have interfered on more than one occasion to set right the affairs of the trust so that the trust is properly conducted and the college and the school run by the trust are properly run. No doubt, it is recognised that aggrieved parties have the necessary right and remedy to approach the higher Courts, but the lev
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
