Malipuram Sanketham Hajeeeth Pall i Juma-ath Malippuram v. V.U. Hassan, K.P. Abdul Rasheed, The Kerala State Wakf Board

**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI** **&** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI** **MONDAY, THE 6[TH] DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943** ## **CRP(WAKF) NO. 452 OF 2013** ## **OS 24/2011 OF WAKF TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM** ## **PETITIONER/S:** 1 MALIPURAM SANKETHAM HAJEETH PALLI JUMA-ATH MALIPPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT T.K.ANWAR, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.T.K.KHALID KATTARATHU PARAMBIL HOUSE, MALIPPURAM. 2 M.H.MOHAMMED SHEREEF S/O.M.M.HASSAN,AGED 50 YEARS MAMMUSURKA PALLIPARAMBU, MALIPPURAM, PRESENT SECRETARY, MALIPPURAM SANKETHAM HAJEETH PALLI JUMA-ATH, MALIPPURAM. 3 C.K. SHAFI, S/O.C.K.KUNJUMUHAMMED,AGED 43 YEARS CHEMMANAD HOUSE, MALIPPURAM, PRESENT TREASURER MALIPPURAM SANKETHAM HAJEED PALLI, MALIPPURAM. BY ADV SRI.ESM.KABEER ## **RESPONDENT/S:** 1 V.U.HASSAN,AGED 67 YEARS VADUKAPARAMBIL, MALIPPURAM. 682 511 2 K.P. ABDUL RASHEED SO.PAREED,AGED 51 YEARS, KURUDANPARAMBIL, MALIPPURAM PO, KOCHI TALUK.- 511 3 THE KERALA STATE WAKF BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, WAKF BOARD OFFICE, V.I.P. ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI - 682 017 BY ADV SHRI.T.K.SAIDALIKUTTY, SC, WAQF BOARD ## **OTHER PRESENT:** SC,JAMSHEED HAFIZ/ ADV.SHRI SHIBLI NAHA THIS CRP (WAKF ACT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: **CRP(WAKF) NO. 452 OF 2013** -2- ## **S.V.BHATTI & BASANT BALAJI, JJ.** - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - ## **C.R.P.(WAKF) NO. 452 OF 2013** - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ## **O R D E R** (Dated this the 6[th] day of December 2021) ## Basant Balaji J., The petitioners were defendant Nos.1 to 3 and respondent Nos.1 and 2 were the plaintiffs in W.O.S. No.24 of 2011 on the files of the Wakf Tribunal, Ernakulam. The plaintiffs filed suit for declaration and injunction. 2. The case of the plaintiffs in brief is as follows:- The plaintiffs are the members and beneficiaries of the first defendant Juma-Ath. The defendants are the elected office bearers of the Juma ath. The plaintiffs used to offer regular and Friday congregational prayers in the first defendant Juma-ath Mosque. During Friday congregation the Juma-Khutuba is being conducted in **CRP(WAKF) NO. 452 OF 2013** -3- the language of Malayalam after observing the essentials in Arabic. The said practice and custom is being followed in the first defendant Juma-ath from time immemorial. As per the practice while the faithful assemble in the Masjid for Juma prayers, the Imam will deliver the Khutuba addressing them by standing on a pulpit. Recitation from Holy Quran and Dua, after exhortation to virtue, the Khateeb would deliver religious advice to the assemblage. The advice part made by the Imam is being conducted in Malayalam language in his own words discussing religious and contemporary issues while standing on pulpit. On 13.8.2010, at the instance of the second defendant, the Imam started Malayalam speech standing on the floor stating that the Khutuba will be conducted in Arabic hereinafter instead of Malayalam language. This was objected by the followers. The plaintiffs are entitled to hear and listen to the Khutuba in language understood **CRP(WAKF) NO. 452 OF 2013** by them. In case the advice to the assemblage for the Friday congregation is delivered in a language not known to them, they cannot understand it and thereby the very object of the Khutuba will be frustrated and Juma prayer will be rendered unfruitful. 3. It is understood that the defendants had taken decision to introduce new mode of Khutuba according to their wishes even without informing the Mahallu members or the General Body and if the defendants succeed in their attempts, it will cause irreparable injury, loss and great hardship to the plaintiffs and members of the Juma-ath and hence, the suit was filed. 4. The defendant Nos.1 to 3 filed a joint written statement. The first defendant Juma-ath is an ancient Masjid and the custom and practice followed in the Masjid is the practice accepted by the Ahalu Sunnathwall Jamaath. During Friday congregation, the Khutuba is not being delivered in the language of Malayalam. Such a practice **CRP(WAKF) NO. 452 OF 2013** -5- and custom attached to Juma Khutuba on Friday is alien to the practice and custom of Ahalu Sunnathwall Jama-ath. The contention that if the advice to the assemblage for the Friday congregation is delivered in Arabic, the Juma prayers will be rendered unfruitful is baseless. The General Body was convened and discussed the issue and unanimously decided to follow the custom and practice prevailing in the Masjid. Since the Khuthuba is being delivered in Arabic and there is no basis for any apprehension alleged in the plaint, no loss or hardship is caused to the plaintiffs. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the suit. 5. The Wakf Tribunal, after an elaborate consideration of the evidence adduced as well as the documents produced by both the parties, allowed the suit and decreed as follows:- “In the result, this suit is decreed (1) declaring that the decision taken, if any, by the **CRP(WAKF) NO. 452 OF 2013** -6- defendants to change the mode of Khuthuba in Malayalam language to Arabic language in connection with Friday Juma prayers in the first defendant Juma-ath to void ab-initio, and (2) defendants are restrained by a permanent prohibitory injunction from changing the mode of Khuthuba in Malayalam language on the pulpit on the Friday congregation into Arabic language.” 6. The said decree is challenged in this revision. 7. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is no cause of action for the plaintiffs to file the suit. The practice and custom followed in the Jama-ath where Khuthuba has performed in connection Juma-ath prayer is in Arabic language and it was never in Malayalam language. The reliance placed by the Tribunal on the decision reported in **Muhammed v. Moideen Haji** [2000 (2) KLT 216] is wrong and that the said facts in that case is entirely different from the facts said in this case. The **CRP(WAKF) NO. 452 OF 2013** -7- general body of the Juma-ath has not taken any decision and hence, the relief for declaration that a decision taken, if any, by the Juma-ath will not be entertainable as there is no cause of action for filing the suit. Khuthuba is a part of the prayer in connection with juma on Fridays and it is an universal phenomenon applicable to an universal religion and it should be practiced in the common way of custom and practice. The Tribunal went wrong in decreeing the suit and restraining the defendants from changing the mode of Khuthuba in Malayalam language on the pulpit on Friday congregation into Arabic language, is wrong. 8. The suit was necessitated as there was apprehension for the plaintiffs that Juma Khthuba which was being conducted in Malayalam language after observing the essentials in Arabic is going to be delivered in Arabic alone by which the majority members of the Juma-ath will not be able to understand the same. The **CRP(WAKF) NO. 452 OF 2013** -8- specific case of the plaintiffs is that from time immemorial the practice and custom being followed by the defendant Juma-ath is that during Friday congregation Juma Khuthuba is being delivered in the language of Malayalam after observing the essentials in Arabic. The Wakf Tribunal relied on a decision reported in **Muhammed** (supra), in which a learned Single Judge of this court had an occasion to consider a similar issue regarding the Khuthuba in vernacular language. The learned Single Judge held as follows:- “Khuthuba is meant to advise the assemblage in Juma prayer, is not disputed by either side. In such circumstances, it shall be in a language known to the assemblage, as already mentioned above, it is the mandate for the Muslims that they shall follow the path set by the prophet, wherever Holy Quran is silent. Holy Quran does not speak about Khutuba. The prophet had performed Khutuba in Arabic and not in any other language, because that was the **CRP(WAKF) NO. 452 OF 2013** language known to and understood by the assemblage before him. Therefore, the path set out by him is to address the Khutuba in the language known to and understood by the assemblage. When such path set by the prophet is followed, necessarily, taking into account the purpose behind Khutuba, the advice part shall always be in the language known to the assemblage, wherever it is performed. When it is performed in the plaint schedule mosque, where admittedly the language generally known to the Muslim public is only Malayalam, the Khutuba shall be performed observing the essentials in Arabic, in Malayalam in the advice part.” 9. Thus, in view of the dictum laid down above, the question is already settled by this court. The Wakf Tribunal relying on the above decision has decreed the suit declaring that the decision taken in view, if any, by the defendants to change the mode Khuthuba from Malayalam language to Arabic language in connection with Friday Juma prayers **CRP(WAKF) NO. 452 OF 2013** -10- would void ab-initio and the defendants were restrained by a permanent prohibitory injunction. We have gone through the judgment of the Tribunal as well as the decision mentioned above and we are of the opinion that the Wakf Tribunal has rightly decreed the suit relying on the judgment of this court and there is no illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the Tribunal. We find no reason to interfere with the judgment of the Tribunal and hence, this C.R.P. is accordingly dismissed. **SD/S.V.BHATTI, JUDGE** **SD/BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE** _dl/_