Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S., JJ
AYIRANI JUMA-ATH PALLI AND BURIAL GROUND REPRESENTED BY ITS MUTAWALLI, KALLIYATH BASHEER AHAMMED – Appellant
Versus
THEYYAMPATTIL ABDUL RASAQ – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of the case regarding the management of waqf. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. counterarguments by respondents regarding management claims. (Para 3) |
| 3. document submissions and hearing details. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. appellants' arguments citing jurisdiction and relevant jurisprudence. (Para 6) |
| 5. respondents' opposition on jurisdictional validity. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 6. court's observations on jurisdiction and injunction application. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 7. court's conclusion directing case reassessment by the tribunal. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
JUDGMENT
Muralee Krishna S., J.
The plaintiffs in WOS No.60 of 2025 on the file of the Wakf Tribunal, Kozhikode (the ‘Tribunal’ for short) filed this MFA (Waqf), invoking the provisions under Section 83 (9) of the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act , 1995, as amended by the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 (‘Waqf Act’ for short), being aggrieved by the order dated 16.01.2026 passed by the Tribunal in I.A.No.2 of 2025 filed by the appellants- plaintiffs for temporary injunction, under Order 39 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure , 1908 (‘CPC’ for short), whereby, the Tribunal dismissed that interlocutory application on the groun
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
