2025:KER:23554 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. V. JAYAKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 27TH PHALGUNA, 1946 CRP(WAKF) NO. 30 OF 2024 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 23.04.2024 IN WOS NO.82 OF 2023 OF WAKF TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE REVISION PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF: SHANAVAS AGED 51 YEARS S/O. LATE PAREED MANAKKANDATHIL HOUSE, PUTHUPPADY P.O. PIN – 686673, VELOORKUNNAM VILLAGE PERUMATTOM KARA, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DIST, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MUHAMMED SHAFI AGED 48 YEARS, S/O. ABOOBACKER, PAREKKAKUDY HOUSE, PUTHUPPADY P.O. PIN – 686673 VELLOOR KUNNNAM VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, E.RNAKULAM DIST., PIN - 686673 BY ADVS. P.A.ABDUL JABBAR SIRAJ KAROLY MUHAMMED SHAFFI RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: 1 JAMAL AGED 57 YEARS 2025:KER:23554 CRP(WAKF) NO.30 OF 2024 2 S/O. MEERAN, ILLATHUKUDY HOUSE, PEZHAKKAPILLY P.O. PIN 686674, MULAVOOR VILLAGE, PEZHAKKAPPILLY KARA, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DIST., PIN - 686674 2 ALIYAR AGED 57 YEARS S/O. BAPPU, MUTHIRAKKALAYIL HOUSE, PEZHAKKAPILLY P.O. PIN 686674, MULAVOOR VILLAGE, PEZHAKKAPPILLY KARA, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DIST., PIN - 686674 3 SUHARA BEEVI AGED 72 YEARS W/O. LATE PAREED MANAKKANDATHIL HOUSE, PUTHUPPADY P.O. PIN – 686673,VELOORKUNNAM VILLAGE PERUMATTOM KARA, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DIST., PIN - 686673 4 THE KERALA STATE WAKF BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, VIP ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI., PIN - 682018 BY ADVS. M.S.UNNIKRISHNAN Jamsheed Hafiz ALEENA MARIA JOSE(K/000520/2017) M.ARDRA KRISHNAN(K/000990/2017) AADITYA NAIR(K/000952/2017) C.KIRAN DEV(K/001042/2024) SOHAN VARGHESE FRANCIS(K/1360/2024) OTHER PRESENT: SRI JAMSHEED HAFIZ SC WAQF THIS CRP (WAKF ACT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:23554 CRP(WAKF) NO.30 OF 2024 3 JUDGMENT Amit Rawal, J. Petitioner had filed the suit with the following prayers: “A) Pass a decree and judgment declaring that the plaint ‘A’ schedule property and the building portions situated therein is a Waqf property and the defendants 1 and 2 or anybody claiming under them have no manner of ownership or right over the said property. B) Pass decree and judgment restraining the defendants 1 and 2 and everybody claiming under them from alienating or encumbering the plaint “A” SChedule Property separately or making it as part of plaint “B” schedule property. C) Pass a decree and judgment fixing the southern and eastern boundaries of plaint 'A' schedule property. D) Pass such other orders which may deemed fit to be passed in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and E) Direct the contesting defendants to pay the cost incurred by the plaintiffs in the above proceedings.” 2. During the pendency of the suit, had brought on record the document Ext.A1 settlement 2025:KER:23554 CRP(WAKF) NO.30 OF 2024 4 deed dated 15.06.1965 and also Ext.A3 sale deed dated 15.06.2012. The total chunk of land in B schedule property is 30 cents. The total land measures as 1 Acre 52 cent, out of which, an area of 50 sq.mt. is Mosque and another 31 sq.mt. is a shop. The remaining area, which is shown in pink colour in the site plan prepared by the Survey Commissioner, has been sold by the mother of the petitioner in whose favour the petitioner had executed the release deed. 3. Learned Tribunal dismissed the suit on the grounds of non challenging of the sale deed as well as locus standi. 4. During the course of arguments, we have gone through the site plan placed on record and are of the view that the mosque is situated in 50 sq.mts. of land, which is shown in yellow colour as 1A in the site plan-Exts.C2 and C2(a). Learned 2025:KER:23554 CRP(WAKF) NO.30 OF 2024 5 counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer qua injunction, that 1A being the Mosque, has been dedicated as Wakf and shall be registered in due course, but cannot be interfered by the defendant under the garb of a sale deed in respect of the portion shown as 1B and 2 in pink colour. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that the defendants have no claim with regard to the property shown in yellow colour, 1A, measuring 50 sq.mts. 6. In this view of the matter, we modify the judgment under challenge by granting declaration and injunction in favour of the petitioner, declaring that the area measuring 50 sq.mtrs, where the Makbara and Mosque are situated, which is shown as 1A in yellow colour in the site plan, to be a Wakf property. The defendants shall not interfere into the peaceful possession of the Makbara. Rest 2025:KER:23554 CRP(WAKF) NO.30 OF 2024 6 of the prayers in the suit with regard to the schedule property and area 1B, shall stand dismissed. Revision stands disposed off accordingly. Sd/- AMIT RAWAL, JUDGE sd/- K.V. JAYAKUMAR, JUDGE Scl/