Case Summary
The plaintiffs, members of Hidayathul Islam Jamaath, sought injunction against the defendants, who administer the Jamaath. The court found it had no jurisdiction over the case as it involved waqf property.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found the suit not maintainable due to jurisdiction issues related to waqf property and directed the plaintiffs to file the suit in the proper forum.
Key Reasoning:
The court determined it lacked jurisdiction over waqf matters.
The court determined it lacked jurisdiction over waqf matters.
Why Defendant Won:
The court determined it lacked jurisdiction over waqf matters.
The court determined it lacked jurisdiction over waqf matters.
Supporting Evidence
Therefore, this court does not have jurisdiction by virtue of Sec.83 of Waqf Act,1995 to try the matter relating to Waqf.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, this court is satisfied that the suit is not maintainable and is returned to be instituted in proper forum.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Yoonus
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- S/o Late Sali
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Mohammed P T
- Party Age
- 65
- Relation
- S/o Late Soofi
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Anoob P M
- Party Age
- 37
- Relation
- S/o Mohammed P T
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Haseeb K M
- Party Age
- 40
- Relation
- S/o Late Mohammed Sali
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Habeeb Mohammed
- Party Age
- 71
- Relation
- S/o Late Shahul Hameed
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Hidayathul Islam Jama-Ath Committee
- Relation
- Represented by its Secretary
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Shajahan V A
- Relation
- President, Hidayathul Islam Jama-ath Committee
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Manju Rajan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Jayalakshmi D S
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- P A Abdul Jabbar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Muhammed Shaffi
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
A decree of mandatory injunction directing the defendants to accept the monthly subscription from the plaintiffs and allow them to take part in the general body meeting.
Evidence:
Therefore, to allow the plaintiff to ignore the Waqf Tribunal and to seek a decree of permanent injunction and mandatory injunction from a civil court, would be ignore the mandate of section 83 and 85 which speak of any dispute, question or other matter relating to a waqf or a waqf property as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rashid Wali Beg’s case(supra).
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
To pass a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from convening the general body meeting without permitting the plaintiffs to attend.
Evidence:
In the result, this court is satisfied that the suit is not maintainable and is returned to be instituted in proper forum.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Injunction and Access Rights
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Yoonus et al vs Hidayathul Islam Jama-Ath Committee et al regarding injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Yoonus et al vs Hidayathul Islam Jama-Ath Committee et al regarding injunction