The court emphasized that membership rights in Waqf must be addressed by principles of natural justice, affirming no dual membership without necessary procedural compliance.

ORDER AMIT RAWAL, J.

Petitioner had approached the Tribunal with a suit of mandatory injunction seeking a direction to Njalakam Muslim Jama-ath Committee for issuance of the membership and a declaration that he is entitled to have ordinary membership in the Jama-ath on the premise that he had been a resident of Kalamassery and residing near the first defendant Jama-ath from 2009 onwards with his family.

2. The first defendant Jama-ath is a registered Wakf with the third defendant, which was established in 1902, and is having its own bye-law approved by the General Body, which came into existence on 22.04.2007. At present, petitioner is a member of the Karingamthuruth Jama-ath, Thathapilly, Paravur at a distance of 18 Kilometers from Kalamassery. He started his residence near the Njalakam Jama-ath from the year 2009 onwards and ready to avail the terms and conditions stipulated in the Bye-law and submitted an application on 09.07.2009 for conferring the membership, but defendant Nos.1 and 2 did not give the membership and therefore was impelled to file the suit. The aforementioned suit was contested by the defendants by filing the written statement contending that, in order to become a member, a person has to relinquish his previous membership, much less cannot hold a dual membership. There was suppression of the material facts, as the plaintiff had also been a member of one Jama-ath, namely, the Vattekkunnam Muslim Jama-ath and this fact emerged in the cross examination before the Tribunal.

3. Learned Tribunal on the basis of the following materials on record and evidence, dismissed the suit but issued the directions as follows:

Plaintiff’s Exhibits:-

A1 : 27.09.2012 : Bye-law of Kalamassery Njalakam Muslim Jama-ath, South Kalamassery, Cochi.

A2 : 30.08.2010 : Copy of order in CRP No.414/2010 of Hon’ble High Court of Kerala. (W.O.A. 4/2010 Dated 14/05/2010 of Wakf Tribunal, Ernakulam)

A3 : 15.12.2009 : CC of order in Enquiry Proceedings No.3115/CR of Kerala State Waqf Board.

Defendant’s Exhibits:-

B1 : 25.12.2001 : Constitution of Vattekkunnam Muslim Jama-ath, Edappally North, Cochi.

“20. Issue No.1:- The question is whether suit is maintainable or not. Suit is one for declaration and mandatory injunction in connection with dispute regarding issuance of membership to the plaintiff in the Njalakam Muslim Jam-ath. The question is relating to membership in a Waqf. There is no express or implied bar in dealing with this case. Hence, it can be safely concluded that the suit is maintainable before this Tribunal. Issue is answered accordingly.

21. Issue Nos. 2 and 3:- Plaintiff is claiming that he is entitled for membership in the Njalakam Muslim Jama-ath. He is seeking a declaratory decree to the effect the he is entitled for ordinary membership in the Njalakam Muslim Jama-ath and also a mandatory injunction directing defendants 1 and 2 to issue membership to the plaintiff. As we know, the declaratory decree is the discretion of the courts. It is with respect to the entitlement of a person to any legal character, or to any right as to any property. It can be a suit against any person denying his title to such legal character or right. It is made clear in Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act that the Court may in its discretion make therein a declaration if it feels that the plaintiff is so entitled. Here, in this suit, there is no question of any right as to any property to be declared. On the other hand, the plaintiff is claiming his right to get membership. The question is whether such right can be termed as any legal character which the plaintiff is entitled to. As far as the declaratory remedy mentioned in of the is concerned, were are of the opinion that plaintiff as such is not entitled for any such legal character and therefore, not entitled for any declaratory decree regarding issuance of membership to a m