IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Anil K. Narendran, Muralee Krishna S., JJ
MUTHIYATHUMAAL MASJID NOOR SUNNI MAHALLU JA-AMATH – Appellant
Versus
SAYYED FAKARUDHEEN CHERUKOYA THANGAL – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. parties argue procedural lapses in mutawalliship (Para 5 , 6) |
| 2. direct board enquiry without nullifying registration (Para 7 , 8) |
Respondents 2 to 6 in W.O.A.No.40 of 2019 on the file of the Wakf Tribunal, Kozhikode have filed this M.F.A(Waqf), invoking the provisions under sub-section (9) of Section 83 of the Waqf Act, 1995 , which was re-named as the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995 (for brevity ‘the 1995 Act’), vide Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, challenging the order dated 20.01.2026 of the Tribunal in that W.O.A, which was one filed by the 1st respondent herein, invoking the provisions under sub-section (2) of of the 1995 Act, challenging the order dated 17.10.2006 of the 3rd respondent Kerala State Waqf Board.
2. The Tribunal, by the impugned order dated
20.01.2026, allowed W.O.A.No.40 of 2019. Paragraphs 19 and also the last paragraph of that order read thus;
“19. The learned counsel for the applicant argued that the 1st respondent Waqf Board failed to comply Section 32 (1) of the Waqf Act as well, wherein it is specifically provided that “in exercising its powers under this Act in respect of any waqf, the Board shall
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.