Ruled in favour of M.K. Venu and Others (Applicants)
In Short
Several property and college management applicants challenged an older order made by the Kerala State Waqf Board before a Waqf Tribunal. During that process, the applicants asked the tribunal for permission to send written questions to the Board to get direct answers. The tribunal allowed this, prompting the Waqf Board to appeal the decision to the High Court.
The Parties
Party A: The Kerala State Waqf Board
Party B: M.K. Venu, Princy Joseph, Antoney V.L., Sebastian Joseph, and other connected applicants and respondents
Advocates & Judges
For Party A: Learned Advocate Mr. Jamsheed Hafiz
For Party B: Learned Advocate Mr. George Poonthottam (Sr.), Learned Advocate Mr. Anas V., Learned Advocate Mr. Kalam Pasha B., Learned Advocate Mr. C.C. Anoop, Learned Advocate Mr. K. Shahzad, Learned Advocate Smt. Nisha George, Learned Advocate Smt. S. Parvathi, Learned Advocate Smt. T.K. Sreekala, Learned Advocate Smt. Nikitha Susan Paulson, Learned Advocate Smt. Uthara Asokan, Learned Advocate Smt. Krishnendu S.R., Learned Advocate Smt. Vishakha J., Learned Advocate Smt. Hasna Ashraf T.A., Learned Advocate Mr. Anandu U.R., Learned Advocate Mr. Hamdan Mansoor K., Learned Advocate Mr. T.U. Sujith Kumar, Learned Advocate Sarun Rajan, Learned Advocate Smt. Lakshmi Sreedhar
Judge(s): Hon'ble Justice Anil K. Narendran, Hon'ble Justice Muralee Krishna S.
What the Case Was About
The background details are not deeply discussed in this specific High Court record, but the dispute centers around a challenge by various individuals against an executive order passed by the Kerala State Waqf Board back in May 2019. When the matter reached the Waqf Tribunal in Kozhikode, the applicants wanted specific facts clarified by the Board itself. To do this, they used a legal tool allowing them to submit a formal set of written questions to the opposing side before the trial goes further. The tribunal permitted them to do so, which made the Waqf Board unhappy enough to bring multiple appeals before the High Court of Kerala.
Judgment Date
6 October 2026
The Outcome
The High Court handled these connected appeals together, reviewing whether the lower tribunal acted correctly by allowing written questions to be delivered to the Waqf Board.
What the Court Looked At
- The court examined appeals filed by the Kerala State Waqf Board against orders passed by the Waqf Tribunal in Kozhikode.
- It reviewed interlocutory applications where applicants sought leave to deliver written questions to the Board under civil procedure rules.
- The judges noted that the underlying dispute arose from an older execution order passed by the State Waqf Board.
What This Means For You
When you are fighting a case against a large government or institutional body, you do not always have to rely solely on documents they choose to share. As shown in this case, ordinary citizens can sometimes use formal legal mechanisms like written questions to extract clear facts and answers from the opposing authority early in the dispute. If an institution is withholding clarity or dodging details, exploring formal discovery tools can help level the playing field. Setback Solutions is here to help you understand these procedural options and coordinate your next steps with clarity.
You Still Have Options
Facing a complex dispute with a government board or feeling stuck after an adverse administrative order can make you wonder what to do next. Whether you are dealing with a property challenge or wondering how to handle procedural hurdles in a tribunal, you do not have to navigate it alone. You can reach out to Setback Solutions to help talk through your situation, explore a second opinion, or coordinate the right non-judicial guidance. Please remember that Setback Solutions is not a law firm and does not give legal advice or guarantee any specific legal outcome, but we are always ready to help you make sense of your options.