Hidup Untuk Memberi...

Hayah hidup ini hanyalah sekadar sekelip mata berbanding dengan kehidupan di yaummul akhirah. Lantaran apalah kiranya kita memberi walaupun hanya sekadar sekelumit.

Seminar Haluanita

Semalam saya bersama beberapa sabahat haluanita pahang
telah bermusafir bersama2
menuju ke masjid putrajaya untuk mengikuti seminar.
Huhu... sejak kebelakangan ini tak leh nak bermanja2.
Kalau dulu2 program ke mana2 dihantar,
leni masing2 sibuk dengan kerja2 d&t,
maka masing2 perlu berkorban antara satu sama lain.
Hanya redha Allah ku mohon dan doa
agar perjalanan kami selamat pergi dan balik.
Alhamdulillah pengisian seminar yang dapat
mengisi kegersangan hati2 yang ingin mencari
redha Allah dan berkerja dalam d&t kerana Allah.
Satu motivasi yang menyentap jiwa agar tidak
lagi boleh berdiam diri dan perlu keluar,
bangkit dicelah2 masyarakat dan
merungkai permasalahan kehidupan mereka
agar kembali ke jalan illahi.
Kalau bukan kita memikul tanggungjawab
dakwah ini siapa lagi....
Tarbiyyah fi aidikum fi aidikum faqad....

Gift


Dalam kesibukan hari ini didatangi tetamu
dari beijing china.... noradawiyah & kak yam.
Allah izin lupa bawa hp... tak leh nak
tangkap gambar kenang2an
bersama bekas anak2 murid ku.
Terimakasih atas ingatan dengan
memberi cenderahati dari beijing.
Moga Allah melindungi kehidupan mu
dalam pencarian hidup bermatlamat.
Belajar betul2 tau...

Dua...

Secara kebetulan gambar berdua2an diambil
secara berturutan...
Nak keluar je dewan multaqa' terserempak
dengan firdaus dan nasir dua2 koperator.
Sedang menunggu giliran untuk bergambar
On the way nak masuk makmal
nampak dari jauh dua sahabat baik
lab assistant
sedang bersenang2 menjengah koridor.
Tepi makmal pulak,
terserempak dengan dua kembar
hassan dan hussin nak pergi pjk...

Semua berdua2an...
Disekeliling kita juga banyak yang berdua2an.
Tinggi rendah.
Gemuk kurus.
Panjang pendek.
Besar kecil.
Hitam putih.
Ketawa menangis.
Suka duka.
Baik jahat.
Huhu... nak senarai tak habis2...

Lalu....

Hidup kita juga ada dua jalan.
"
Dan Kami telah menunjukkan kepadanya
dua jalan."
Surah Al Balad : 10
Jalan ma'ruf jalan mungkar.
Jalan kebaikan jalan kemungkaran.

Kenapa dua jalan?
"Apakah manusia mengira
bahwa ia akan
dibiarkan begitu saja
(tanpa pertanggungjawaban)?"
Surah Al Qiyamah : 36

Namun dengan rahmat dan kasih sayang
Allah memberi kita garis panduan
ke arah mana kita ingin hala tuju kehidupan ini.
"Maka apakah kamu mengira bahwa sesungguhnya,
Kami menciptakan kamu secara main2 (saja),

dan bahwa kamu tidak akan
dikembalikan kepada Kami.
Maka Mahatinggi Allah, Raja yang sebenarnya;

tidak ada Tuhan (yang berhak disembah)
selain Dia,
Tuhan (yang mempunyai)
'Arsy yang mulia?"
Surah Al Mu'minun :115- 116

Kata as syahid hassan al banna,
Wahai manusia... dihadapan mu ada dua jalan.
Tidak ada jalan yang ke tiga.

Pertama adalah jalan yang rata, teduh, terang,
indah, dikelilingi ketenangan, wewangian
dan dipagari oleh keindahan disetiap tempat.
Awal perjalanannya adalah
keyakinan dan keimanan.
Jarak perjalanannya adalah
istiqamah dan taat kepada Allah.
Sedangkan akhir perjalannya adalah
syurga dan ridha, di tempat yang disenangi
disisi Tuhan yang Berkuasa....

Jalan kedua adalah jalan yang
sunyi, sepi, gelap dan berbahaya.
Awal perjalannnya adalah
pengingkaran dan kekufuran.
Jarak perjalanannya adalah kemaksiatan.
Akhir perjalanannya adalah
neraka jahanam....

Lalu kitalah akan membuat pemilihan
jalan yang mana hendak kita pilih
dan pengakhiran yang bagaimana
yang ingin kita kecapi...

Wallahu'alam.

Alumni smkpb's teachers...

Hari ini ke btpnp beserah menghadiri
majlis anugerah nilam daerah kuantan.
Turut diadakan selepas itu perjumpaan
guru2 media dan guru2 penyelaras ict.
Namun saya dan rakan2 lain pulak ceritanya.
Majlis bertukar menjadi alumni
bekas guru2 yang pernah mengajar di smkpb....
Alhamdulillah, kami masih mesra seperti dulu2.
Ramai yang sudah berjawatan besar....
kak roslizah, guru besar sk jabor
haniliza, gpk smk bukit rangin
kak rakiah, pengetua smk cenderawasih
kak ani, pengetua smk pandan
kak limah, pengetua smk gudang rasau

hjh hatijah gan, pengetua mgs

noranizah, guru media sk mat kilau
kak eshah, guru besar sk air putih
kak maimunah, gpk sk permatang badak
mr lee, guru penyelaras ict sk assunta
sabariah, guru penyelaras ict sk jaya gading
noorsiah, guru penyelaras ict smk alor akar

cuma saya dan nita je...
kami masih setia di smkpb...


A gift

Sudah beberapa hari saya terpandang ada
hadiah di atas meja saya.
Tapi beberapa hari ini memang hectic
sampai tak sempat nak capai....


Tadi barulah dibuka, rupa2nya.... a souvenir...
Thanx kak nab for a lovely keychain.
Moga2 Allah merahmati kak nab sekeluarga
dengan sifatnya yang pemurah itu....


In ICTL class

Today... it's time for 2 fikir's students
present their ictl project pp presentation
.
Memang diketahui umum kelas 2 fikir
ialah kelas yang paling hujung,
maka pelajar2nya almaklumlah...
Tapi alhamdulillah setakat masuk kelas ictl
saya masih lagi mampu control mereka.
Ibarat menarik layang2 yang terbang,
itulah cara nak tackle mereka.
Ada masa kita biar layang2 terbang rendah,
dan ada masa kita biar dia melayang2 tinggi.
tapi ikatan talinya masih kita pegang erat.
Tapi... today... I spot their weakness.
Huhu... dalam nakal & tak berhenti duduk diam,
Italicmereka sebenarnya pemalu....
Even to give salam or
just to introduce their names
,
mereka gabra....
Saya memerhati gelagak anak2 pelajar saya.
Bila disuruh membentangkan projek masing2,
saya menunggu hampir 10 minit untuk
mendengar mereka bercakap.
Masing2 akan menolak kawan untuk
memulakan percakapan.
Rupa2nya anak2 pelajar kita dalam2 nakal
mereka masih ada naluri yang boleh dibimbing.
Maka rebutlah peluang untuk kita mencorak
kain putih itu ke arah kebaikan....


Sesi bergambar...

Aktiviti tahunan.... bergambar ramai2
untuk dimuatkan dalam majalah sekolah.
Bila dah ramai2 tu... macam2 ragam dan kerenah....
ada yang dah duduk kena bangun....
huhu... tak sama tinggi tu...
tukar tempat duduk lagi...
Akhirnya... 1...2...3.... beres...

Bonda

Hari ini genap usia bonda 73 tahun..... Bonda dilahirkan pada 25 Julai 1937. Alhamdulillah sehingga ke hari ini Allah masih memberi kesihatan yang baik buat bonda. Begitu juga dengan ayahanda. Cuma sesekali terkilan jua sebab saya tinggal berjauhan... Dalam meniti penghujung usia, sedih rasa tak dapat nak bela mereka dekat2 seperti mana mereka membelai saya masa kecil2 dulu... Sekarang ini ayahbonda tinggal berdua je di kampung. Nak ajak datang tinggal bersama2 bukan mudah untuk dipujuk. Bila ada betul2 penting baru ayahbonda datang. Namun saya tidak pernah putus berdoa buat mereka berdua. Moga rahmat dan hidayah ALlah mengiringi kehidupan ayahbonda... Ya Allah... Kau ampuni lah dosa kedua ibu bapa ku, rahmati dan kasihanilah mereka seperti mana mereka telah menjaga dan membesarkan ku sepenuh jiwa mereka semenjak dari kecil lagi...

Sehari dua ni dok sibuk pada kes tanah chenderong. Saya sekadar dengar jauh2 je sebab tidak terlibat secara direct. Saya tak lah buat kajian mendalam sekadar mendengar cerita dari bonda. Adalah beberapa article saya jumpa bila search, so I kept it in this blog for future reference. Namun bagi mereka seperti bonda ia satu yang amat bermakna buat mereka. Masa kecik2 dulu saya masih ingat bonda selalu kata, "Ini duit hasil tanah chenderong.", kata bonda sambil menunjukkan cek yang bernilai lebih kurang RM79.00. (sekarang ni nilainya sudah bertambah sikit...) Cek tersebut bonda kumpul dan masukkan dalam akaun tabung haji.

Kata bonda lagi, "Duit tu umi tak belanja, simpan untuk pergi mekah...". Namun bila tiba kesempitan wang diperlukan untuk menampung anak2 belajar, sekali sekala bonda terpaksa juga mengeluarkannya.

Pernah juga bonda menyebut2, "Kalau umi tak ada, duit tu akan bahagi 7 (sebab saya ada tujuh beradik...) berapa senlah sangat sorang dapat..." keluh bonda lagi.

Saya masa tu masih tengah nakal2... mana lah peka tentang kesusahan ayahbonda membesarkan saya. Namun bila masa berlalu difikir2kan, betapa besar ertinya kes chenderong dihati bonda. Selama ini hasil yang tak seberapa itulah membesarkan kami. Walaupun bonda dari keluarga bergelar tetapi hidup bonda dibesarkan bukan dalam suasana bermewah2. Bonda selalu sebut, "
ki su (ayahanda kepada bonda) selalu pesan kalau nak berbelanja, biar ada duit dalam tangan dulu, jangan berhutang..." Bila sudah melalui hidup separuh abad ini barulah mula nak menghargai pesanan2 bonda tu. Itulah susah payah mereka. Rezeki membesarkan anak2 hasil dari titik peluh ayahanda yang bekerja sebagai buruh telekom. Bonda tampung dengan cek hasil dari tanah chenderong dan jualan ma'ajun.

Terlanjur cerita pasal bonda saya, anak2 mesti tanya "
Tok anak raja ke?". Sebenarnya saya tidak pernah cerita kepada mereka keturunan nenek moyang mereka. Hinggalah mereka di peringkat sekolah menengah, pertanyaan2 mula timbul bila anak2 mula membuat kerja kursus salasiah keluarga untuk mata pelajaran sejarah. Saya rasa suami saya pun belum mengetahui sepenuhnya keturunan keluarga saya.... Walaupun waris diraja, perjalanan kehidupan keluarga saya seperti orang lain juga. Lebih2 lagi bila fikrah islam difahami, ini bukannya yang seharus dibangga2kan. Allah masih menilai iman dan taqwa kita bila bertemu denganNya nanti. Anyway some pictures mungkin untuk untuk anak2 saya kenal tok nenek mereka....

This is my grandparents,
Almarhum YAM Tengku Su Tengku Hussein
and Almarhummah YAM Tengku Azizah Habsah .
Bonda selalu bahasakan diri mereka sebagai
ki su dan tok chek.
Saya tidak sempat bersama mereka sebab
mereka sudah tiada bila saya dilahirkan.


My great-grandmother
Almarhummah YAM Tengku Ngah Aishah Al-Hajjah

binti Al-Marhum Sultan Zainal Abidin III.

Bonda selalu cerita dengan gelaran
nyang ku ngah haji.
Ketika bonda saya berusia 15 tahun
bonda telah berada di mesir selama 3 tahun
bersama nindanya ini.


Almarhummah YAM Tengku Nik Maimunah Al-Hajjah
binti Sultan Zainal Abidin III.

She's sister to nyang ku ngah haji
and the owner
of the Chenderong Concession.

This is my great-great-grandfather,
Almarhum D.Y.M.M. Sultan Zainal Abidin Muazzam Shah III

Almarhum Haji (25.4.1864-25.11.1918)


Maka semuanya telah menjadi lipatan sejarah keluarga.
Wallahu'alam....


Namun marilah hati kita merenungi...
"Hari yang padanya harta benda dan anak-pinak
tidak dapat memberi manfaat sesuatu apapun.
Kecuali orang yang datang menghadap Allah
dengan hati yang sejahtera.
Dan (pada hari itu) didekatkan syurga
bagi orang yang bertaqwa.
Dan diperlihatkan neraka jelas nyata
kepada orang2 yang sesat."
Surah Al-Syu'ara : 88 - 91

Ziarah aqiqah


Menghampiri jam 11.00 pagi saya ke rumah
sahabat mantan ustazah kat smkpb,
ustazah siti arija kerana ada sedikit
kenduri aqiqah anakandanya yang
menghampiri usia sebulan.
Datang awal ingatkan nak tolong2
semua sudah siap masak...
Dapat belajar buat air asam orang penang!
Alhamdulillah juga berkenal mesra dengan
mama ja yang memang peramah.
Tahniah sekali lagi buat ja,
moga muhammad akhtar bakal menjadi
rijal dakwah pewaris generasi muttaqqin....

Chenderong VI

The latest news taken from malaysian insider,
kes ditangguhkan.... saya boleh bayangkan betapa
frustnya saudara mara saya....
Tak semua mereka terdiri dari orang yang berada.
.
.
.
.

Kes tanah wakaf Chenderong ditangguh, defendan mahu kes didengar tertutup
July 25, 2010

KUALA TERENGGANU, 25 Julai — Kes tuntutan mencabar status konsesi tanah wakaf Chenderong melibatkan lebih 25,000 hektar, keluasannya hampir sama dengan bahagian pulau negeri Pulau Pinang, ditangguhkan sehingga akhir Januari 2011.

Mahkamah Tinggi Syariah Kuala Terengganu hari ini membuat keputusan atas alasan pihak peguam defendan dan defendan iaitu Majlis Agama Islam dan Adat Melayu Terengganu belum bersedia untuk mengikuti prosiding.

Prosiding sepatutnya berlangsung hari ini dan esok.

Selain itu, mahkamah memutuskan demikian ekoran permohonan ex-parte peguam defendan Faridah Yusof agar media dilarang menyiarkan prosiding mahkamah manakala plaintif dan peguam mereka juga dilarang bercakap kepada media mengenai perjalanan kes.

Mahkamah juga akan mendengar permohonan inter-parte peguam defendan agar kes ini didengar secara tertutup.

Kes didengar oleh Hakim Shaikh Ahmad Ismail.

Perbicaraan ini menarik perhatian kerana iadilihat sebagai kes pertama melibatkan tanah wakaf tunggal terluas di negara ini iaitu 25,379.23 hektar.

Tanah itu yang dikurniakan oleh Sultan Terengganu Almarhum Sultan Zainal Abidin III kepada anakanda perempuan Tengku Nik Maimunah dan suaminya, Tengku Ngah Omar Abdul Rahim pada Mac 1906, dijadikan tanah wakaf pada 1961.

Tuntutan kes difailkan pada Disember 2008 dan selepas beberapa peringkat bantahan awal.

Hakim Shaikh Ahmad memutuskan beliau akan membenarkan permohonan ex-parte untuk melarang media melaporkan kes ini selepas menerima dan meluluskan draf perintah daripada defendan kemudian.

Mahkamah dimaklumkan bahawa pihak defendan bersedia untuk prosiding apabila perintah ex-parte itu dikeluarkan.

Bagaimanapun ia dibantah oleh pasukan plaintif.

Faridah memberitahu mahkamah beliau akan menyerahkan draf dalam waktu terdekat, dipercayai esok untuk diteliti mahkamah.

Permohonan Kamar Ainiah untuk hakim menukar permohonan injuksi ex-parte menjadi inter-parte ditolak.

Faridah yang ditemui selepas sidang mahkamah berkata media tidak boleh membuat liputan sehingga kes selesai.

Katanya, media boleh mendapatkan butiran kes apabila keputusan diterbitkan oleh Malayan Law Journal.

Bagaimanapun beliau enggan mendedahkan kandungan ex-parte.

Media ada tugas untuk melaporkan prosiding kerana ia membabitkan kepentingan awam,” kata Kamar Ainiah.

Kamar Ainiah memberitahu mahkamah bahawa media patut dibenarkan untuk membuat liputan dan jika ada pelanggaran pihak defendan boleh mengambil tindakan sivil terhadap mereka.

Termasuk saya, saya sudah 25 tahun berkhidmat sebagai peguam, ambil tindakan jika saya langgar kod etika guaman,” katanya.

Sambil merujuk kepada kes liwat Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim semasa, Kamar Ainiah berkata media melaporkan dengan panjang lebar prosiding tanpa sekatan mahkamah.

Mahkamah akan mengambil tindakan hanya jika ada pelanggaran keterlaluan.

Apabila Faridah membangkitkan bahawa laporan The Malaysian Insider mengenai kes ini pada 23 Julai lalu telah menggugat dan mengaibkan defendan, Kamar Ainiah berkata media bebas untuk akses kepada mana-mana penyata tuntutan dan jawapan yang merupakan dokumen awam.

Faridah mendakwa The Malaysian Insider telah memaparkan wajah Yang di-Pertuan Agong dengan memetik baginda sebagai salah seorang waris.

Mengenai isu ini, Kamar Ainiah berkata baginda hanya seorang waris dalam tanah wakaf Chenderong dan ia juga satu fakta kes.

Peguam defendan juga meminta kes ini dibuang atas alasan dua plaintif tidak mewakili semua waris dan meminta Hakim Shaikh Ahmad digantikan dengan hakim lain.

Bagaimanapun Kamar Ainiah membantah permohonan itu atas alasan ia tindakan menghina mahkamah kerana enggan mematuhi perintah Mahkamah Rayuan.

Kata beliau, Mahkamah Rayuan pada 8 Jun lalu telah menolak permohonan yang serupa, di mana mahkamah juga telah mengarahkan perbicaraan diteruskan di hadapan hakim yang sama.

Hakim kes berkata beliau tidak mahu meneruskan prosiding hari ini dalam suasana tidak tenang dan bertanya kepada defendan bila mereka bersedia untuk menghadapi prosiding.

Kemudian hakim menetapkan 23 dan 24 Januari depan sebagai tarikh baru perbicaraan.

Saya bersedia bila-bila masa, kalau ada peguam yang tidak bersedia, apa saya boleh buat,” kata hakim.

Kamar Ainiah berulang kali menekankan bahawa pihaknya bersedia untuk prosiding hari ini dengan semua kertas kusa telah sedia ada.

Kalau defendan tak bersedia itu hal mereka, mahkamah kena berlaku adil dengan meneruskan prosiding hari ini,” katanya.

Faridah juga meminta mahkamah tidak mengadakan prosiding pada hari Ahad atas alasan jika media membuat laporan ‘menjejaskan’ kepentingan defendan pada mana-mana hari Jumaat atau Sabtu, pihaknya tidak boleh melakukan apa-apa tindakan susulan sebelum hari perbicaraan.

Kes ini dibawa selepas pewaris konsesi tanah wakaf Chenderong ini, yang terletak di sempadan Kemaman dan Kuantan, meluahkan rasa kesal terhadap cara Majlis Agama Islam dan Adat Melayu Terengganu menguruskan tanah tersebut.

Jumlah pewaris dianggarkan 462 orang, yang hampir kesemuanya merupakan anggota kerabat diraja negeri Terengganu.

Kira-kira 70 waris hadir untuk mendengar prosiding hari ini dan mereka kelihatan kecewa apabila kes ditangguhkan.

Beberapa waris kelihatan mengeluh, antaranya ada yang berkata “tangguh lagi... tahun depan pula”, apabila mendengar keputusan hakim menangguhkan perbicaraan.

Salah seorang pewaris tanah wakaf ini ialah Yang di-Pertuan Agong Sultan Mizan Zainal Abidin yang juga Sultan Terengganu.

Plaintif memohon mahkamah membuat deklarasi bahawa kesemua transaksi berhubung tanah wakaf Chenderong oleh Majlis Agama Islam dan Adat Melayu Terengganu adalah tidak sah di bawah hukum syarak.

Kes ini kali pertama difailkan pada Disember 2008 berdasarkan Seksyen 18(1) Enakmen Tatacara Mal Mahkamah Syariah (Terengganu) 2001.

SUMBER : http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/bahasa/article/kes-tanah-wakaf-chenderong-ditangguh-defendan-mahu-kes-didengar-tertutup/

Pojek JUJ 2010

Ingatkan hujung minggu ini tak adalah aktiviti
sekolah lagi, alih2 semalam dapat surat
hari ini kena hadiri seminar juj di smk seri mahkota.
Ikutkan surat yang dapat sepatutnya
arwah cikgu kamisah akan menghadirinya.

Masih terngiang kata2 arwah...
"Kak pah, ingatkan tahun ini bolehlah saya
keluar2 sekolah pergi kursus, tapi
tak dak budget pulak...."
Sebenarnya tahun ini selepas lebih 1o tahun
saya pegang jawatan ketua panitia add maths,
maka tahun ini saya lepaskan jawatan tu dan
serah kepada arwah supaya beliau pulak
dapat pengalaman2 baru.
Tapi kerana cut budget maka mesyuarat
jkkd daerah tidak dapat dilaksanakan.
Biasanya dalam mesyuarat inilah inhouse
akan diadakan, semua ketua2 panitia dari
daerah seluruh kuantan berkumpul
dan dapat bertukar2 maklumat.
Saya agak terkilan, sebab arwah memang
bersungguh2 dan bersedia untuk mengambil alih
tanggungjawab ini. Namun kita merancang
tapi Allah sebaik2 perancang.... arwah tak sempat
lama bersama. Sekarang ini pulak kelas
add maths arwah masih belum settle
sepenuhnya. Boss saya (pengetua) telah
mengambil alih dua2 kelas arwah.
Tapi semalam dapat berita tergempar lagi
boss dinaikkan pangkat sebagai pegawai ppd raub.
Huhu... nampak memang Allah susun
saya juga akan ambil alih kelas tu...

Pasal projek juj ia adalah anjuran bersama yayasan pahang.
Maka adalah budgetnya....
Penceramah kali ini ialah
sahabat lama saya hjh zainah kebi,
guru cemerlang matematik tambahan
dari smk pandan.
Alhamdulillah... ada lah manafaat juga...
Memberi ruang untuk kami guru2 add maths
daerah kuantan bertemu setelah
mesyuarat jkkd tiada...

Ceramah Tragedi Berdarah Mavi Marmara

Alhamdulillah malam tadi di masjid kariah
sg isap damai fasa 3, jemaah memenuhi
ruang masjid untuk mendengar pengalaman dari
ketua misi lifeline4gaza hj noorazman shamsuddin.
Ceramah yang disampaikan selepas maghrib itu
menyentuh tentang keganasan tentera israel
yang terkenal dengan kezalimannya itu.
Saya tersentuh apabila diceritakan kekuatan2
orang2 di gaza. Antaranya mereka mempunyai
hubungan yang dekat dengan Allah.
Jemaah solat 5 waktu seperti mana
solat jumaat. Boleh kita bayangkan ramainya
mereka dalam mengutamakan solah berjamaah.
Dan di setiap rumah mesti ada seorang hafiz,
malahan mereka akan merasa malu jika
tidak dapat melahirkan seorang hafiz.
Maha suci Allah, benarlah Allah telah
menguji mereka kerana kekuatan
yang mereka milik...
Kita.... apa yang kita miliki...
atau sekurang2nya apa yang telah kita
usahakan untuk menandingi mereka....

Bahagian muslimat juga penuh dengan kehadiran
jemaah2 dari ibu2 veteran yang memang
hati mereka dekat dengan masjid
dan juga kehadiran adik2 dari uia.
Sebelum bersurai, sempat mendengar
ukht mazlina bercerita bagi pihaknya
pengalaman dan sokongan dari seorang isteri.
Betullah... disebalik kejayaan lelaki
ada seorang wanita disisinya...

My students...

Hari Allah menguji kesabaran ku...
Sepagi saya tunggu 6 pelajar 5 syumul
untuk klinik add maths...
Sampai ke sudah mereka tidak muncul2....
Namun hati saya tetap mendoakan
moga satu hari mereka akan berubah....


Chenderong V

More about chenderong...
.
.
.
.
.


This interview was taped on 26 July 2009.

Chenderong IV

Lagi maklumat yang ditemui.
Perbicaraan pada 26 Julai 2009.
.
.
.
.
.

T'ganu wakaf land poser may have national ramifications


Two members of the royal house of Terengganu have filed an action against the Terengganu Islamic and the Malay Customory Land council (Maidam) for misusing wakaf land meant to be used for religious purposes.

Tengku Zainul Akmal Tengku Besar Mahmud and Tengku Hidayah Tengku Habib had named Maidam as the chief defendants of their suit which they had filed in November last year.

The two are said to be the descendents of Tengku Nik Maimunah Sultan Zainal Abidin and Tengku Ngah Tengku Abdul Rahim, both husband wife, who lived in the late 1800's and area said to be related to the Sultan at that time, Sultan Zainal Abidin III.

The sultan was said to have given the couple 25, 000 hectares of land as a gift.

The couple, in due course gave the land back to the state to be used solely for religious purposes.

Tengku Zainul Akmal Tengku Besar Mahmud and Tengku Hidayah Tengku Habib, who are said to represent more than 200 decendants, are now claiming that Maidam has reneged on its pledge and is using the land for commercial purposes.

They are disputing the council's action in leasing a portion of the land within the district of Kemaman for logging and agriculture.

In their statement of claim, the two allege they are the beneficiaries of the said land which was given to their ancestors by the sultan in 1903.

The couple did not have any children but the land was divided and given to relatives.

The outcome of this case may have a huge legal bearing on status wakaf land nationwide which is estimated to be in excess of 4,000 hectares.

This makes the wakaf land in Kemaman or the Chenderong concession the biggest wakaf land in the country.

The plaintiffs content that since the late 1960's the land was used for commercial purposes.

Prior to this, the land was not developed. It was leased to Cindee Developments Sdn Bhd for 999 years which utilised the land for commercial purposes.

In 1985, Maidam agreed to reduce its lease period from 999 years to 99 years which will end in 2084.

According to the statement of claim, sometime in December 1986, a company Tis Ata Ashar Sdn Bhd owned by Menteri Besar Incorporated, Maidam and Terengganu Islamic Foundation, signed several agreements that gave Cindee Developments and SPPT Development Sdn Bhd a deed of assignment to a portion of the Chenderong concession.

Wakaf land cannot be transferred.

Tengku Zainul Akmal and Tengku Hidayah claimed as the land was wakaf land, it cannot be transferred, given an ownership or leased out to a third party for a period of more than three years, according to syariah laws and the Terengganu Islamic Affairs Management Enactment 2001.

The plaintiffs are seeking several remedies that:

1. A firm declaration the Chenderong concession land is wakaf land,

2. That Maidam is the rightful and sole trustee of the land and it cannot be transferred, or given ownership or leased out.

3. Maidam is prevented from violating a fatwa (edict) by the Terengganu mufti in 1971 that wakaf land cannot be transferred to a third party and that any sales and purchase agreement giving ownership or lease is null and void as it is against syaraiah law and the 2001 enactment.

4. That any agreement signed between Tis Ata with Cindee Development and SPPT Development is null and void.

Maidam: Plaintiffs no locus standi

Maidam in its statement of defence filed in February this year, meanwhile said the plaintiffs have no locus standi (legal standing) to initiate the action as they are do not represent the 292 other beneficiaries.

It also denied that the council was a party to the agreement signed between Tis Ata in 1986 and that it was never informed of any agreement to transfer the land deed to the two companies (Cindee and SPPT Development).

The council agreed that the status of the Chenderong land concession is wakaf land but it did not agree that the land could not be leased out as a trustee.


It had the right to ensure income from the property to be given back in return for wakaf purposes as it may not posses the expertise.

The Kuala Terengganu Syariah High Court judge Sheikh Ahmad Ismail ordered the parties to come to an amicable solution in accordance to Islamic law.

Sheikh Ahmad, who had since recused himself from hearing the case had also fixed the case for mention on Oct 4 if there is no settlement.

Chenderong III



More for reference....
.
.
.
.
.



FEDERAL COURT OF MALAYSIA

Embong Ibrahim

- vs -

Tengku Nik Maimunah

Coram

RAJA AZLAN SHAH CJ (MALAYA)

SYED OTHMAN FJ

SALLEH ABAS FJ

1 SEPTEMBER 1979


Judgment

Salleh Abas FJ

(delivering the judgment of the Court)

  1. This is an appeal and a cross-appeal against the decision of Harun J on the validity of a document purported to be a wakaf declared by the first plaintiff on 13 June 1961. The facts of the case may be stated as follows.

  2. On 18 March 1906, equivalent to the 22nd Muharram 1324, the late Sultan Zainal Abidin of Trengganu granted large areas of land in Kemaman known as Chenderong Concession to his daughter, the late Tengku Nik Maimunah, the first plaintiff, and her husband, Tengku Ngah Omar Abdul Rahim, who was then a Minister of State, in equal shares. On the death of her husband, she inherited one-fourth of the husband’s share, thus increasing her share to five-eighths. The late Tengku Nik Maimunah had no children of her own. On 13 June 1961, she executed a document dedicating her total share in the Chenderong Concession into a wakaf in favour of the following beneficiaries:—

    1. her brothers and sisters, nieces and nephews and their children;

    2. four adopted daughters, two of whom are appellants Nos 2 and 3;

    3. two persons who are not her blood relations, one of whom is appellant No 1; and

    4. for religious, pious and charitable objects.

  3. In respect of each of the dispositions to beneficiaries (1), (2) and (3), there is an ultimate disposition to the poor and the indigent. Nine years later, on 21 July 1970, the late Tengku Nik Maimunah executed another document purporting to revoke the wakaf and about a month later, on 30 August 1970, she executed yet another document purporting to surrender her five-eighths share of the Chenderong Concession land to a company named as Sharikat Pembinaan Chenderong Sdn Bhd, the present respondent.

  4. On 26 November 1970, the late Tengku Nik Maimunah commenced a civil action in the High Court, Kuala Trengganu, against Majlis Ugama dan Adat Melayu, Negeri Trengganu (in this judgment referred to as “the Majlis”), and 38 other defendants who are beneficiaries under the wakaf. She asked for a declaration claiming, among other things, that the document she executed on 13 June 1961 did not create a valid wakaf. However, on 1 February 1971, a fatwa by the Mufti of Trengganu stated that the wakaf so created was valid, and this was duly published in the Trengganu Gazette (GN 28/1971) in accordance with the requirements of s 21(3) of the Trengganu Administration of Islamic Law Enactment No 4 of 1955. The next day, i.e. on 2 February 1971, the late Tengku Nik Maimunah withdrew her action against the Majlis, but the suit against the rest of the defendants continued. In the meantime, on 6 April 1971, the late Tengku Nik Maimunah died and the suit would have abated but for the addition of the present respondents as a second plaintiff on 16 May 1971, by an order of the court; and so proceedings continued. On 22 July 1972, Trengganu State Legislative Assembly passed an Enactment known as the Islamic Wakaf Validating Enactment No 10/1972, declaring that family wakaf made in accordance with Islamic law are not to be held invalid merely because of certain specified grounds. This Enactment which has retrospective effect came into force on 8 August 1972.

  5. The trial took place on 15 April 1975 before Harun J who gave a judgment in favour of the validity of the wakaf but only to the extent of one-third of wakaf property because of s 61 of the Administration of Islamic Law Enactment of Trengganu No 4/1955. Three of the beneficiaries appealed against the decision claiming that the wakaf is wholly valid and that the one-third limitation only applies to a wakaf made by will or during death illness. The respondents, on the other hand, lodged a cross-appeal contending that the wakaf is wholly invalid.

  6. For the purpose of our judgment, we feel it convenient to deal firstly with the question of validity of the wakaf, and secondly, only after this question has been answered in the affirmative, will we consider the effect and scope of s 61 of the Administration of Islamic Law Enactment No 4/1955, in order to consider whether the validity of the wakaf is as whole or as to one-third of the wakaf property.

  7. Wakaf is an established Islamic institution founded on religion. The Trengganu Administration of Muslim Law Enactment No 4 of 1955 recognises two types of wakaf, namely wakaf am (general wakaf) and wakaf khas (special or private wakaf). Section 2 of the Enactment defines these two wakaf as follows:—

    wakaf am’ means a dedication in perpetuity of the capital and income of property for religious or charitable purposes recognised by Islamic law, and includes the property so dedicated.

    wakaf khas’ means a dedication in perpetuity of the capital of property for religious or charitable purposes, recognised by Islamic law, and includes the property so dedicated, the income of which is to be paid to a person or persons for purposes prescribed in the wakaf.

  8. Amongst the operative words of these definitions are “for religious or charitable purposes recognised by Islamic law” but nowhere is this expression explained in the Enactment. This Enactment does not legislate upon the substance of Islamic law, as it merely deals with the “administration” of Islamic law. The meaning of the expression “for religious or charitable purposes recognised by Islamic law” must therefore be found elsewhere. In the Commissioner for Religious Affairs v Tengku Mariam [1969] 1 MLJ 110; [1970] 1 MLJ 222 the Mufti of Trengganu issued a fatwa duly gazetted under s 21 of the Enactment upholding the validity of a wakaf made in favour of the settlor’s family and relatives with ultimate gifts for religious purposes. However, both the High Court and the Federal Court rejected the fatwa as being binding upon the court. Applying the decisions of their Lordships of the Privy Council in Abul Fata Mahomed Ishak v Russomoy Dhur Chowdhury (1894) 22 IA 76; ILR 22 Cal 619 and Fatumah v Mohamed Salim, [1952] AC 1 Wan Suleiman J, as he then was, held that the wakaf was invalid. In the Federal Court its validity was saved on a narrow technical ground in that, because the beneficiaries had by their conduct previous to the suit accepted the validity of the wakaf, the doctrine of estoppel precluded them from challenging its validity. Nevertheless, Suffian FJ as he then was, writing the main judgment of the court, re-affirmed as did the East African Court of Appeal in Fatumah, that the decisions of their Lordships of the Privy Council on wakaf were binding, upon the court and suggested that the embarrassing situation should be rectified by legislation.

  9. What then is the law as enunciated by these decisions? According to Mohamed Ahsanullah Chowdhry v Amarchand Kundu (1889) 17 IA 28; ILR Cal 498 a wakaf for the benefits of the settlor’s family, children and descendants and for charity, will only be valid if there is a substantial dedication of the property to charitable uses at some period of time or other. In any case, such a wakaf will not be valid if the primary object is for the aggrandisement of the settlor’s family and the gift to charity is illusory either because of its small amount or of its uncertainty or remoteness of objective (Abul Fata). This latter decision created dissatisfaction amongst the Muslim scholars and jurists in India and as a result of representations and protests, the Indian legislature passed the Mussalman Waqf Validating Act VI of 1913; and as the Act was not given retrospective effect, another validating Act was passed in 1930, thereby saving any family wakaf with the ultimate object for charity from invalidity irrespective of whether it was created before, on or after 1913. It was thought until recently that the decision of their Lordships in Abul Fata was purely confined to Muslim law as applied in India. However, this belief was rejected by their Lordships in Fatumah v Mohamed Salim in which their Lordships re-affirmed the correctness of their decision in Abul Fata and thus cleared all doubts as to the scope of their decision being confined to India only. Their Lordships said that they “cannot accept the theory .... that the interpretation of the Mohammadan law given by this Board in a series of cases is confined to the law as applied or administered in India.” (p 14)

  10. Such is briefly the development of Muslim law on wakaf in India.

  11. Reverting to Muslim law in Trengganu, the wakaf law seems to follow the same course of events as it did in India. The suggestion by the Federal Court that the embarrassing situation created by the precedents of their Lordships of the Privy Council’s decisions should be corrected by legislation, was accepted by the Trengganu State Assembly which subsequently on 22 July 1972, passed the Islamic Wakaf Validating Enactment No 10 of 1972. The Enactment received the Royal Assent on 3 August 1972 and thus on that date became law. So just as in India the Privy Council’s decisions on family wakaf were nullified by the Mussalman Waqf Validating Acts of 1913 and 1930, in Trengganu their decisions which the court considered binding in Tengku Mariam are similarly nullified by legislation, i.e. the Islamic Wakaf Validating Enactment 1972.

  12. The Islamic Wakaf Validating Enactment 1972 does not purport to lay down what the constituent elements of a valid wakaf are. These, however, must be determined with reference to the definition given by s 2 of the Administration of Muslim Law Enactment No 4 of 1955 and in turn with reference to pure Islamic law and text. What the Enactment does is merely to declare that a wakaf will not be held invalid merely because “among other purposes” of the wakaf are the following four objects, namely —

    1. that the wakaf is for the maintenance and support wholly or partially of the settlor’s family, children or descendants, provided that there is an ultimate gift for the benefits of the poor or any other purposes recognised by Islamic Law (s 2(1)(a);

    2. that in the case of Hanafi sect, the wakaf is for the settlor’s maintenance and support during his or her lifetime and for the payment of his or her debts out of the rents and profits of the property, provided that there is an ultimate gift for the benefit of the poor or any other purpose recognised by Islamic law (s 2(1)(b);

    3. that the ultimate benefits reserved for the poor or other purposes recognised by Islamic law is small or postponed until the total extinction of the settlor’s family, children or descendants (s 2(2)); and

    4. that the wakaf is for the benefits of strangers, i.e. persons other than the family, children or descendants of the settlor (s 2(3).

  13. It is noted that a wakaf coming under categories (1), (2) and (3) was held invalid by the decisions of their Lordships of the Privy Council in Ahsanullah and Abul Fata, and that as regards the wakaf coming under category (4), i.e. wakaf in favour of strangers; this has never been the subject-matter of their Lordships’ decision. As the Islamic Wakaf Validating Enactment 1972 is merely laying down the rules preventing such wakaf from being held invalid, the question of its validity must be, as intended by the legislature, determined in accordance with pure Islamic law and text and not one which is largely influenced by the concept of charitable trusts and rules against perpetuities in English law.

  14. Counsel for the respondents submitted that the Islamic Wakaf Validating Enactment 1972 has no retrospective effect and therefore has no application to the wakaf in the present case which was made in 1961. Consequently, the decisions of their Lordships of the Privy Council stated above should be applicable. In our judgment, there is no merit in this submission because it is clear that s 3 of the Enactment which states —

    This Enactment shall apply to all wakaf created in the State before its commencement.

    is retrospective. The wakaf created by the late Tengku Nik Maimunah was made on 13 June 1961, and therefore the Enactment which says what it means or means what it says must govern this wakaf. Counsel for the respondents further submitted that even if s 3 of the Enactment gives a retrospective effect to the legislation, the proviso to this section takes the wakaf in the present case completely outside the sphere of the Enactment. For this purpose, it is necessary to quote s 3 in detail, which is as follows:—

    3.

    This Enactment shall apply to all wakaf created in the State before its commencement:

    Provided that nothing therein contained shall be deemed in any way to affect any rights, titles, obligation or liability already acquired, accrued or incurred before the commencement of this Enactment.

  15. The proviso of this type is usually enacted in most legislations giving retrospective or current effect. For the proviso to apply, it must be shown that in a period between 13 June 1961, the date when the wakaf was made, and 3 August 1972, the date of the commencement of the Enactment, some rights or titles have already been acquired or accrued or some obligations or liabilities have been incurred as regards this particular wakaf. Our finding on this question is in the negative. According to the statement of facts of the case at page 19 of the Appeal Record, on 27 July 1970, the late Tengku Nik Maimunah wrote to the Majlis to revoke the wakaf and on 30 August 1970 she executed an instrument of surrender purporting to surrender her share in the Chenderong Concession to the respondents. These two acts by the settlor, in our view, did not create any right nor any obligations having been incurred. It is obvious that the very act of revoking the wakaf by sending a letter to the Majlis on 30 August 1970 pre-supposes her acceptance and attitude as to the validity of the wakaf. She must have regarded that the wakaf was valid, or she would not have purported to revoke it. In Islamic law, there is no question of revocation of a valid wakaf. Her act in executing a surrender of the property to the respondents is consequential upon the validity of her revocation of the wakaf. Since in Islamic law a settlor cannot revoke the wakaf, likewise the purported surrender of the wakaf property to the respondents does not give rise to rights and liabilities to anyone. In our view, the proviso to s 3 only operates as regards a wakaf which would have been invalid but for the Enactment where the parties or someone else had acted in such a way as to prejudice their positions. In this case, as no rights nor obligations have been acquired or incurred, we do not see any merits in the submission that the proviso operates to exclude the wakaf from the sphere of the Enactment.

  16. The Islamic Wakaf Validating Enactment 1972, whilst preventing a wakaf from being held invalid on certain specified grounds, insists that “in all other respects” a wakaf must be “in accordance with the provisions of Islamic law”. Counsel for the respondents therefore submitted that this wakaf is not in accordance with Islamic law and therefore invalid because it is only the income and not the corpus of the property which is dedicated. In Islamic law, for a wakaf to be valid the endowment must be the dedication of the capital as well as the income. In this case, what then is the subject of the wakaf? Counsel’s submission that it is only the income which is dedicated is based on the following words of the section:—

    I endow in perpetuity all the rights, interests and income derived from the 5/8 (five-eighth) share of the said Chenderong Concession ...

    This sentence, however, is an English translation rendered from the original Malay version which is —

    Saya telah mewakafkan dengan kekal-nya menghabisi semua hasil dan hak faedah yang didapati daripada 5/8 (lima per delapan) daripada tanah Chenderong Concession ....

  17. Here we agree with the submission of counsel for the appellants that the English translation is not accurate as it does not give any effect to the pronoun “nya” attached to the word “kekal-nya”. We also think that no effect is given to the word “menghabisi” (meaning completely or without reservation or remainder). The pronoun “nya” and the word “menghabisi” in our opinion refer to the five-eighths of the Chenderong Concession land, and that being the case, we hold that what has been dedicated or endowed is not just the income derived from five-eighths of the Chenderong Concession, but the very five-eighths of the land itself. This view is further strengthened by a clause in the wakaf instrument regarding the expenses of the management of the wakaf. Here the settlor, the late Tengku Nik Maimunah, directed that before the income is distributed to the various beneficiaries, the expenses for the management to the extent of 7/144 must be deducted from the gross income derived from “that part of Chenderong Concession that is endowed” or in Malay original “daripada tanah Chenderong Concession yang diwakafkan” (English translation at page 77, the original Jawi version at page 59 and Romanised version at page 67). It is therefore obvious that what is dedicated is not just the income or profits derived from the Chenderong Concession, but also the very land itself. Hence, we reject the submission by the counsel for the respondent.

  18. The wakaf created by the late Tengku Nik Maimunah contained a long list of beneficiaries, among whom are the present three appellants. Appellant No 1, Haji Embong lbrahim, was given 3/144 shares of the wakaf property, whilst Appellants Nos 2 and 3 were given 2/144 shares each. Appellant No 1 is not related to the late Tengku Nik Maimunah, whilst Appellants Nos 2 and 3 are her adopted daughters. It was submitted by the counsel for the respondents that the wakaf is invalid because as regards Appellant No 1 the wakaf is made in favour of a stranger and as regards Appellants Nos 2 and 3 it is made in favour of persons who are not members of the settlor’s family. Although Appellant No 1 is not related by blood to the late Tengku Nik Maimunah, and therefore cannot be classified as a member of her family, the disposition in his favour is clearly not to be held invalid because sub-s (3) of s 2 of the Enactment enacts as follows:—

    No such wakaf shall be deemed to be invalid merely because part of the benefits reserved therein is given to person or persons other than the family, children or descendants of the person creating the wakaf.

  19. This means that a wakaf in favour of a stranger, if valid in Islamic law, will not be held invalid. In lsmail Haji Arat v Umar Abdulla AIR 1942 Bom 155, a settlor made a wakaf in favour of his nephew, Hoosein Noor Mahomed, and after his death to his nephew’s heirs with ultimate gifts to charity. The Bombay High Court held that Hoosein Noor Mahomed who used to reside with the settlor and was also maintained by him was a member of the family of the settlor because Hoosein Noor Mahomed passed both tests of what constitutes “a family”. He was residing in the settlor’s house for whose maintenance the settlor was mainly responsible and he was also connected with the settlor through a common progenitor or by having a common lineage. Therefore, a wakaf in his favour came within the ambit of s 3(a) of the Mussalman Waqf Validating Act 1913. The Bombay High Court, however, refused to uphold the validity of the wakaf made in favour of Hoosein Noor Mahomed’s heir because the heir was a stranger as he was neither residing with nor depending for his maintenance upon the settlor, nor was he connected through a common progenitor with the settlor. Chagla J who gave the judgment of the court said:—

    If I were to hold that the disposition in favour of the heirs of Hoosein Noor Mahomed is a good disposition, it would amount to my holding that the settlor would tie up his property in perpetuity in favour of persons who were neither his children nor his descendants nor members of his family. I therefore hold that the disposition in favour of the heirs of Hoosein Noor Mahomed does not come within the purview of the Mussalman Waqf Validating Act and the disposition is therefore bad in law.

  20. It must, however, be remembered that the Indian Mussalman Waqf Validating Act does not contain a provision similar to sub-s (3) of s 2 of the Trengganu Islamic Wakaf Validating, Enactment 1972, which prevents or saves a wakaf from being held invalid if otherwise valid under Islamic law merely because it is created in favour of persons other than the family, children or descendants of the person creating a wakaf. For this reason, Ismail Haji Arat v Umar Abdullah cannot be an authority for the proposition that a wakaf to a stranger is invalid. That case simply decided on the scope of the Indian Mussalman Waqf Validating Act 1913. It is clear from the above quoted judgment, that Chagla J was still influenced by the concept of charitable trust and the rules against perpetuities as understood in English law. Whereas in our case those rules should play no part at all in the disposition of property under Muslim law. To put the matter clear, it is sufficient to reproduce s 25 of the Civil Law Enactment 1956 which is as follows:—

    Nothing in this Part shall affect the disposal of any property according to Muslim law ....

  21. “This Part” is Part VII of the Act and it deals with rules against perpetuities. However, this does not dispose the mater yet. The basic question has still to be answered, i.e. whether or not under the pure Islamic law and text a wakaf in favour of a stranger is valid. The study of works by distinguished Indian authors such as Ameer Ali, Tyabji and Fyzee show clearly that a disposition in favour of a stranger is valid. Fyzee, 2nd Ed, at page 252, says:—

    .... Is poverty a necessary condition for obtaining benefit from a wakaf?

    According to Mohammadan law, wakaf may be made (i) for the affluent and the indigent alike; or (ii) for the affluent and thereafter for the indigent; or (iii) for the indigent alone. The law does not insist that a man must necessarily be proved to be poor before he can take the benefit of a wakaf. Poverty is one of the many qualities that are recognised as being capable of attracting the benefit of a wakaf, but it is by no means a sine qua non. Therefore, all persons, regardless of considerations of wealth, are entitled to come in as beneficiaries. Nevertheless, it is perfectly correct to say that when all other purposes fail, the relief of the poor is ultimate purpose of every wakaf.

    Thus it is clear that the objects of a wakaf may be different from the objects of a charitable trust as understood in English law.

  22. Ameer Ali in vol 1, 5th Ed (1976) says that a wakaf may be created for the benefit of any person or class of persons or for any object of piety or charity (page 273), and among the objects of a valid wakaf is a gift to strangers (pages 276–277). Similarly, Tyabji, 2nd Ed (1919), after observing that the Mussalman Waqf Validating Act 1913 contains no reference to the question whether the provisions in favour of others than members of the family, children and descendants of the “waqif” (settlor) are valid, goes on to say that provisions in the wakaf may be made in favour of strangers (page 571).

  23. In Hashim Ali v Iffat Ara Hamidi Begum, (1942) 46 Cal WN 561 the Calcutta High Court has taken the view that the provision for a small pension for three of the faithful servants would not render the wakaf invalid, as the main purpose of the wakaf in question was not to make settlement on those servants. In Mt Akhtar Banu Begum v Kanhaiya Lal, AIR 1941 Oudh 492 it was held by the Oudh High Court that payments of sums of money directed to be made in the wakaf to two servants of the settlor were valid, though they were not members of the family of the settlor. In the opinion of the court, the provisions contained in the Mussalman Waqf Validating Act 1913 are not exhaustive as the words used are “among other purposes”. In Abdul Wahab v Sughra Begum, AIR 1932 All 248 Allahabad High Court held that a disposition in a wakaf for the payment of salary and pensions to servants was valid. The court in this case acting upon the opinion of Ameer Ali and Tyabji rejected the contention that for a wakaf in favour of a stranger to be valid, the stranger concerned must be poor. Thus a review of Indian cases on a wakaf in favour of stranger shows that three High Courts, i.e. Calcutta, Allahabad and Oudh benches upheld the validity of such wakaf. Only Bombay High Court in Ismail Haji Arat v Umar Abdulla held otherwise. Whatever force of the decision in this case may have, it is clear that it is inapplicable to our situation because the Indian Act contains no provision relating to validity of a wakaf made in favour of persons other than the family of the settlor. Thus the way is open to the judge in that case to apply the wakaf law coloured by the concept or charitable trust and rules against perpetuities as understood in English law, instead of the wakaf law as expounded and interpreted by Muslim scholars and jurists. We therefore reject the contention that a provision for Appellant No 1 is invalid. Such provision is valid in Islamic law and further saved from invalidity by s 2(3) of the Islamic Wakaf Validating Enactment 1972.

  24. As regards the dispositions in favour of the Appellants Nos 2 and 3 who are adopted daughters of the late Tengku Nik Maimunah, in our view, such dispositions are also valid, because not only the dispositions in favour of strangers are valid, but also because adopted daughters must be regarded to be members of the settlor’s family. It was contended that as Islamic law does not recognise adoption, adopted children cannot form part of the family of a settlor. In Abdul Mabud Khan v Nawazish Ali Khan, AIR 1925 Oudh 301, it was held that whilst distant collaterals such as cousins in the fourth and fifth degree cannot be viewed as members of the family, the word “family” in the Mussalman Waqf Validating Act 1913 includes those persons residing in the house of the settlor for whose maintenance the settlor is mainly responsible. In Mt Musharraf Begum v Mt Sikandar Jehan Begum AIR 1928 All 516 it was held that a wakaf in favour of a widow’s son, i.e. daughter-in-law, was valid because she was held to be a member of the settlor’s family. Similarly, in Ismail Haji Arat case, a nephew living in the house of the settlor who treated and maintained him as his son was held to be a member of the family. In our judgment, the test of what constitutes “family” adopted by these Indian cases is correct. It is one that we ourselves are disposed of to hold. We therefore hold that these two appellants being adopted daughters and living with the settlor must be regarded as members of the settlor’s family. The dispositions in their favour are valid. Even if they are not to be regarded as members of the family of the late Tengku Nik Maimunah, as strangers there is nothing in law which prevents such dispositions from being otherwise than valid. Pure Islamic law as expressed in the opinions of learned authors and as applied by a number of High Court Benches in India upholds the validity of a wakaf made in favour of strangers. Furthermore, s 3(2) of the Trengganu Wakaf Validating Enactment 1972 clearly validates such wakaf.

  25. For the reasons stated above, we now hold that the wakaf made by the late Tengku Nik Maimunah on 13 June 1961 is valid and the cross-appeal therefore fails.

  26. We now come to consider the appeal proper by the present three appellants. Harun J in the court below held that the wakaf is valid only to the extent of one-third because s 61 of the Trengganu Administration of Islamic Enactment No 4 of 1955 enacts as follows:—

    Whether or not made by way of will or death-bed gift, no wakaf or nazar made after the commencement of this Enactment and involving more than one-third of the property of the person making the same shall be valid in respect of the excess beyond such one-third unless expressly sanctioned and validated by the beneficiaries.

  27. It is the contention of the appellants that this section only deals with wakaf or nazar which is made by way of will or death-bed gift and that it has no reference whatsoever to a wakaf or nazar made inter vivos. Consequently, in their submissions the wakaf in this case being made during the lifetime of the settlor must be wholly valid.

  28. According to Islamic law, a Muslim has power during his lifetime to transfer all his property to anyone, but after his death or during his death illness in the absence of consent by his heirs, he may only do so to the extent of one-third of the property. A wakaf under Islamic law can be made either inter vivos or by way of will. An inter vivos wakaf takes effect immediately to divest the ownership in the property from the settlor. Consequently, the one-third limitation has no application to an inter vivos wakaf. But where a wakaf is created by will or made during the death illness of the deceased settlor, the one-third limitation applies unless such wakaf is consented to by the heirs. Consequently, in the absence of such consent, only the gift to the extent of one-third of the wakaf property is valid. Reverting now to s 61 of the Trengganu Enactment, in our view, it is clear that this Enactment never contemplates of legislating upon or changing the substance of Islamic law particularly on this point which is so basic. Far from it, as it is merely an Enactment which its long title says —

    To consolidate the law relating to the administration of all matters relating to the Religion of Islam and the religious courts.

  29. Since by the unwritten Islamic law, the one-third limitation applies only to a wakaf or nazar made by way of will or during death illness, it can never have been the intention of the Trengganu Legislature that such one-third limitation also applies to wakaf made inter vivos, such as the one in this appeal. Furthermore, a close reading of s 61 clearly shows that it merely deals with a wakaf or nazar made by will or death-bed gift. It made no mention of a wakaf made inter vivos.

  30. The expression “whether or not made by way of will or death-bed gift” must be interpreted to mean what it says. It does not and cannot, however, refer to a wakaf made inter vivos which is not said in the expression. The general principle expression unius exclusio alterius or expressum facit cessare tacitum must therefore apply. In view of our reasonings above, we agree with the submission of the counsel for the appellants that the wakaf in this case is wholly valid and that the one-third limitation contained in s 61 of the Enactment, being confined only to wakaf or nazar made by way of will and death-bed gift, has no application to the wakaf in the present case.

  31. Hence we allow the appeal and dismiss the cross- appeal with costs here and the court below. The deposit has to be refunded to the appellants.


Cases

Commissioner of Religious Affairs v Tengku Mariam [1969] 1 MLJ 110; [1970] 1 MLJ 222; Abul Fata Mahomed Ishak v Russomoy Dhur Chowdhury [1894] 22 IA 76; ILR 22 Cal 619; Fatumah v Mohamed bin Salim [1952] AC 1; Mohamed Ahsanullah Chowdhry v Amarchand Kundu [1889] 17 IA 28; ILR Cal 498; Ismail Haji Arat v Umar Abdulla AIR [1942] Bom 155; Hashim Ali v Iffat Ara Hamidi Begum [1942] 46 Cal WN 561; Mt Akhtar Banu Begum v Kanhaiya Lal AIR [1941] Oudh 492; Abdul Wahab v Sughra Begum AIR [1932] All 248; Abdul Mabud Khan v Nawazish Ali Khan AIR [1925] Oudh 301; Mt Musharraf Begum v Mt Sikandar Jehan Begum AIR [1928] All 516

Legislations

Islamic Wakaf Validating Enactment Act, 1972

Trengganu Administration of Islamic Law Enactment, 1955, s 61.

Authors and other references

Fyzee, 2nd Ed

Ameer Ali in vol 1, 5th Ed (1976)

Tyabji, 2nd Ed (1919)

Representation

ST Chung (Joseph Tan with him) for the appellants.

Miss KL Chen for the respondent.

SUMBER : http://www.ipsofactoj.com/archive/1979/Part4/arc1979%284%29-009.htm

Chenderong II



Some information obtained bila jalan2 cari
maklumat tentang chenderong
.
Although bahasa mahkamahnya kurang difahami,
I kept here for my future reference...
.
.
.
.
.

Civil Suit No 80 of 1970


HIGH COURT OF MALAYA

Coram

Tengku Nik Maimunah

- vs -

Council of Religion and Malay Customs of Trengganu



HARUN J

15 APRIL 1978


Judgment

Harun J

  1. This case concerns a wakaf created by Tengku Nik Maimunah Almarhum Sultan Zainal Abidin of Trengganu where the plaintiffs claim inter alia:

    A declaration that the said purported wakaf is void.

  2. The agreed facts are as follows: –

    (1)

    On Sunday 22 Muharram 1324 (Al Hijjrah) corresponding to 18 March 1906 the late Sultan Zainal Abidin of Trengganu, made a grant of the lands known as the Chenderong Concession to his daughter, the first plaintiff, Tengku Nik Maimunah and her husband Tengku Ngah Omar Abdul Rahim, in equal shares.

    (2)

    On the death of her husband the first Plaintiff became by Islamic Law the owner of an undivided share in the Chenderong Concession.

    (3)

    On 13 June 1961 the first plaintiff made a document which purports to be a Wakaf. The instrument is in Malay in the Jawi script and was registered in the office of The Council of Religion and Malay Customs.

    (4)

    On 21 July 1970 the first plaintiff wrote to the Commissioner for Religious Affairs, Trengganu to revoke the Wakaf.

    (5)

    On 30 August 1970 the first plaintiff executed an Instrument of Surrender whereby she purported to surrender her share in the Chenderong Concession to the second plaintiff.

    (6)

    On 26 November 1970 the first plaintiff commenced these proceedings.

    (7)

    On 1 February 1971 a Fetua on the validity of the Wakaf by the Mufti of Trengganu was published in the Government of Trengganu Gazette in accordance with s 21(3) of the Administration of Islamic Law Enactment, 1955.

    (8)

    On 2 February 1971 by order of the High Court at Kuala Trengganu the first Plaintiff withdrew allegations against the first defendant, Council of Religion and Malay Customs of Trengganu and the first defendant conceded to judgment in this cause.

    (9)

    On 6 April 1971 the first plaintiff died at the age of 87 years.

    (10)

    On 16 May 1971 by order of the High Court at Kuala Trengganu, the second plaintiff was added as a party and the proceedings continued between the second plaintiff and the remaining defendants Nos 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 20.

    (11)

    On 8 August 1972 the Islamic Wakaf validating Enactment, 1972 passed by the Trengganu State Legislative Assembly on 22 July 1972 became law.

    (12)

    The first plaintiff, Tengku Nik Maimunah was a Muslim resident in the State of Trengganu until her death and defendants Nos 2 to 39 all professed the religion of Islam.

  3. A Wakaf is a Muslim trust settlement of property for religious or charitable purposes. It follows therefore that Part VII of the Civil Law Act, 1956 relating to disposal and devolution of property applies and in particular s 25 which reads:

    Nothing in this part shall affect the disposal of any property according to Muslim law or, in Sabah and Sarawak, native law and custom.

  4. What then is the Muslim law applicable to this case. The relevant provisions on Muslim law in the Federal and State Constitutions are: The Federal Constitution:

    Article 3(2):

    In every State ... the position of the Ruler as the Head of the Muslim religion in his State in the manner and to the extent acknowledged and declared by the Constitution of that State, and, subject to that Constitution, all rights, privileges, prerogatives and powers enjoyed by him as Head of that religion, are unaffected and unimpaired;

    Article 73:

    In exercising the legislative powers conferred on it by this Constitution –

    (b)

    the Legislature of a State may make laws for the whole or any part of the State.

    Article 74(2):

    Without prejudice to any power to make laws conferred on it by any other Article the Legislature of a State may make laws with respect to any of the matters enumerated in the State List (that is to say, the Second List set out in the Ninth Schedule) or the Concurrent List.

  5. Ninth Schedule, List II – State List:

    1.

    Except with respect to the Federal Territory, Muslim Law and personal and family law of persons professing the Muslim religion, including the Muslim Law relating to succession, testate and intestate, betrothal, marriage, divorce, dower, maintenance, adoption, legitimacy, guardianship, gifts, partitions and non-charitable trusts; Muslim Wakafs and the definition and regulation of charitable and religious trusts, the appointment of trustees and the incorporation of persons in respect of Muslim religious and charitable endowments, institutions, trusts, charities and charitable institutions operating wholly within the State; Malay custom; Zakat, Fitrah and Bait-ul-Mal or similar Muslim revenue; mosques or any Muslim public place of worship, creation and punishment of offences by persons professing the Muslim religion against precepts of that religion, except in regard to matters included in the Federal List; the constitution, organisation and procedure of Muslim courts, which shall have jurisdiction only over persons professing Muslim religion and in respect only of any of the matters included in this paragraph, but shall not have jurisdiction in respect of offences except in so far as conferred by federal law; the control of propagating doctrines and beliefs among persons professing the Muslim religion; the determination of matters of Muslim Law and doctrine and Malay custom.

  6. The Trengganu State Constitution

    Article III.

    The Religion of the State shall be the Muslim Religion heretofore professed and practised in the State.

    Article IV(1).

    The Head of the Religion of the State shall be His Highness and the Council of Religion and Malay Customs, in English the Council of Religion and Malay Customs, constituted under the existing State law shall continue to aid and advise His Highness in accordance with such law.

    Article XII(2).

    His Highness may act in His discretion in the performance of the following functions (in addition to those in the performance of which He may act in His discretion under the Federal Constitution), that is to say –

    (d)

    any function as Head of the Muslim Religion or relating to the custom of the Malays.

    Article XII(3).

    State law may make provision for requiring His Highness to act after consultation with or on the recommendation of any person or body of persons other than the State Executive Council in the exercise of any of His functions other than –

    (a)

    functions exercisable in His discretion; and

    (b)

    functions with respect to the exercise of which provision is made in the State Constitution or the Federal Constitution.

  7. The 1911 Constitution known as “The Constitution of the Way of Illustrious Sovereignty” –

    Chapter Two:

    The Raja who governs Trengganu must always be of the Mohammedan religion and of the Malay race and of the lineage and descent of the Sultans of Trengganu ...

    Chapter Fifty-one:

    Whereas it has been asserted and laid down and established that for all time this Government of Trengganu is of the comity of Islam in Malaya that is it is called the State and Official religion, no other religion whatever may be set up or referred to as the State religion, however many of other races or creeds are protected and allowed to shelter in the State and provinces of Trengganu.

  8. It may be observed that the 1911 Constitution was promulgated by Sultan Zainal Abidin the Third, the father of the first plaintiff and witnessed by Tengku Ngah (Omar) Abdul Rahim, Wazir and Minister, the husband of the first plaintiff.

  9. It would appear, therefore, that the Muslim law referred to in s 25 of the Civil Law Act, 1956 is the Muslim law professed and practised in the State of Trengganu subject to any rules in its administration that may be regulated by the State Laws of Trengganu. In particular, the Muslim law on Wakaf in Trengganu is subject to the provisions of the (Trengganu) Administration of Islamic Law Enactment, 1955 and the (Trengganu) Islamic Wakaf Validating Enactment, 1972. That, in my view, is the law, and I so hold.

  10. I now turn to the instrument creating the Wakaf.

  11. It is the validity of this document that is in issue in these proceedings. It was executed at Kuala Trengganu on 13 June 1961 by the first plaintiff and witnessed by a Magistrate of the State of Trengganu. The original is in the Malay language and typewritten in the Jawi script and bears the following certificate by the Magistrate in English:

    Read over and explained to Tengku Nik by Embong Yusoff Ibrahim and admitted correct by her.

  12. The first part of the instrument is a recital

    1. as to how the first plaintiff became the owner of share of the Chenderong Concession;

    2. that it was leased by her to Cindee Development Ltd on 2 January 1961 for a term of 999 years; and

    (c)

    With effect from the date of this letter, be it known that I, the undersigned Tengku Nik Maimunah Al-Hajjah Al-Marhum Al-Sultan Zainal Abidin, in sound mind and good physical health, wilfully and without force or pressure from anybody whatsoever, declare, affirm and witness that I dedicate (wakaf) in perpetuity all income and rights of interest derived from the (five eighth) share of the said Chenderong Concession to those persons stated hereunder in accordance with the rates of distribution that I have stipulated for each person stated in pages 2–5.

    (1)

    To my younger brother His Highness Al-Sultan Ismail Nasiruddin Shah, DMN ibni Al-Sultan Zainal Abidin is granted 16/144 share which will remain his and subsequent to him on his death his children will be entitled to receive equal number of shares among them from that share and thereafter on their death their shares will be distributed to their respective descendants and on cessation of direct descent of any one of them his respective share will be returned to the poor and destitute persons among the Muslims, under the management and administration of the Islamic Affairs Department, Trengganu.

    Then follows grants in identical terms to other brothers and sisters as follows:


    (2)

    To my elder sister, Tengku Ngah Aishah Al-Hajjah Al-Marhum Al-Sultan Zainal Abidin is granted 24/144 share ....


    (3)

    To my younger sister Tengku Wok Aminah Al- Marhum Al-Sultan Zainal Abidin (Tengku Kesu’ma Puri) is granted 7/144 share ....


    (4)

    To my younger brother, Tengku Ahmad ibni Al-Marhum Al-Sultan Zainal Abidin is granted 16/144 share ....


    (5)

    To my younger brother, Tengku Besar Mahmud ibni Al- Marhum Al-Sultan Zainal Abidin (Tengku Seri Utama Raja) is granted 16/144 share ....

    In identical terms also are rants to other relatives as follows: –


    (6)

    Each of my following nephews and nieces respectively gets an equal share out of 8/144 share: –

    1.

    Tengku Ali ibni Al-Marhum Sultan Sulaiman.

    2.

    Abdul Aziz ibni Al-marhum Sultan Sulaiman.

    3.

    Abdul Rashid ibni Al-Marhum Sultan Sulaiman.

    4.

    Abdul Rahman Al-Haj ibni Al-Marhum Sultan Sulaiman.

    5.

    Asma’ Al-Marhum Sultan Sulaiman.

    6.

    Wok ‘Atikah Al-Marhum Sultan Sulaiman.

    7.

    Mariah Al-Marhum Sultan Sulaiman.

    8.

    Tengku Azizah Al-Marhum Sultan Sulaiman ....


    (7)

    To my niece, Tengku Tengah Ex-Sultan Muhammed is granted 2/144 share ....


    (8)

    To my niece, Tengku Puteri Tengku Muda is granted 2/144 share ....


    (9)

    To my nephew, Tengku Embong Tengku Muda is granted 2/144 share ....


    (10)

    To my grand nephew, Tengku Embong Abdullah Tengku Hitam Abdul Majid is granted 2/144 share ....


    (11)

    To my great grand child, Tengku Ismail Tengku Abdul Aziz is granted 2/144 share ....


    (12)

    To Tengku Teh Kharzaki is granted 1/144 share ....

    Life interests only and then to the poor –


    (13)

    To my nephew-in-law Tengku Su Hussain is granted 3/144 share ....


    (14)

    Embong Yusof Ibrahim is granted 3/144 share ....

    Then to 4 adopted daughters as follows:


    (15)

    Mahani Sulaiman is granted 4/144 share until extinction by descent and then to the poor.

    (16)

    Jawahir Abdullah 2/144 share in perpetuity until her grand-children and then to the poor.

    (17)

    Mariam Mohammad, 2/144 share in perpetuity until her children and then to the poor.

    (18)

    Mek Long Abdullah, 2/144 share for life and then to the poor.


    (19)

    Embong Abu Bakar, 1/144 share for life and then to the poor.

    The remaining shares are allotted to various religious and charitable objects, in all 22/144 shares.

  13. The first plaintiff then appointed herself for life as controller of the wakaf with directions as to who should succeed her as controller after her death.

  14. In the pleadings the plaintiffs claim that the wakaf is void on the grounds following:

    That the first plaintiff retained control of the wakaf contrary to s 59 of the Administration of Islamic Law Enactment, 1955;

    That there was a failure to vest in the Trengganu Council of Religion and Malay Customs the property of the wakaf in accordance with s 60 of the Administration of Islamic Law Enactment, 1955; and the wakaf is contrary to Muslim law for the following reasons:

    (a)

    There is no clear and true dedication in perpetuity of the donor’s interest for Islamic and/or charitable purposes.

    (b)

    The dispositions contained in the alleged wakaf are subject to such uncertain contingencies as to invalidate the whole wakaf.

    (c)

    Numerous uncertainties in the wakaf are contrary to muslim Law which recognises the validity of only those wakaf that are capable of being justly administered.

    (d)

    The disposition contained in the alleged wakaf is too illusory and remote and that it was solely created for the benefits of the first plaintiff’s immediate relatives.

    (e)

    The purported wakaf is void on the ground that it does not conform to the Muslim Law of Wakaf.

  15. The defendants on the other hand contend:

    (a)

    That the plaintiff in bringing this action for a declaration that her said wakaf is void is in effect attempting to revoke her own wakaf. Under Muslim law the plaintiff cannot revoke her own wakaf after the wakaf’s dedication has been completed.

    (b)

    That the said wakaf is valid and binding on the plaintiff by reason of the fact she is and was at all material times resident in the State of Trengganu and the validity of the wakaf was affirmed by a fetua (hereinafter called the fetua) of the Mufti of Trengganu and duly published pursuant to s 21(3) of the Administration of Islamic Law Enactment, 1955 in the Government of Trengganu Gazette as Notification No 2 vol 24 Supplementary No one dated 11 February 1971.

    (c)

    That the said wakaf is valid and binding on the plaintiff by virtue of the Islamic Wakaf Validating Enactment, 1972.(d) That the present suit should have been commenced in the Court of the Chief Kathi in accordance with the Administration of Islamic Law Enactment, 1955 and not in the High Court and accordingly the High Court should not entertain this suit.

    CONTROL

  16. Section 59 of the Administration of Islamic Law Enactment provides:

    Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary contained in any instrument or declaration creating, governing or affecting the same, the Corporation shall be the sole Controller of all wakaf, whether wakaf am or wakaf khas, and all nazar am, and of all trusts of every description creating any charitable trust for the support and promotion of the Religion of Islam or for the benefit of Muslims in accordance with Islamic law, to the extent of any property affected thereby and situate in the State and, where the settler or other person creating the trust, wakaf or nazar am was domiciled in the State, to the extent of all property affected thereby wherever situate.

    Section 2 defines:

    akaf am’ means a dedication in perpetuity of the capital and income of property for religious or charitable purposes recognized by Islamic Law, and includes the property so dedicated;

    akaf khas’ means a dedication in perpetuity of the capital of property for religious or charitable purposes recognized by Islamic Law, and includes the property so dedicated, the income of which is to be paid to a person or persons or for purposes prescribed in the wakaf;

    nazar am’ means an expressed vow made by a person creating an obligation upon himself to do any beneficial act for the benefit of the Muslim community generally or in part as distinct from an individual.

  17. It seems to me that the words of s 59 are clear and notwithstanding the fact that the first plaintiff purported to retain control of the wakaf, the Council of Religion and Malay Customs (i.e. the Corporation) by virtue of this provision became the controller the moment the first plaintiff created the wakaf on 13 June 1961.

    VESTING

  18. As regards Vesting, s 60 of the Administration of Islamic Law Enactment provides:

    (1)

    (a)

    All property which on the coming into force of this Enactment is subject to the provisions of the preceding section shall if situate in the state vest in the corporation.

    (b)

    Immovable property vested in accordance with sub-s (a) of this section may be recorded or registered in the name of the Corporation upon proof to the satisfaction of the Collectors that such land is so subject. The Collector may subject to his verification and so certifying accept in evidence lists of land so subject supplied by the Commissioner.

    (2)

    Land which subsequent to the coming into force of this Enactment becomes subject to the provisions of the preceding section may be recorded or registered in the name of the Corporation upon presentation of a memorandum of transfer executed by the parties thereto or upon filing with the Collector an order of the Court, Civil Court or a Collector in a probate, administration or distribution suit.

    (3)

    The Corporation shall take all necessary steps to vest in the Corporation for the like purposes any such property situate elsewhere than in the State.

  19. It would appear, therefore, that once a wakaf becomes subject to the control of the Corporation the property vests in that Corporation although the memorandum of transfer has not yet been executed. Be that as it may, the pleadings concerning control and vesting were not pursued by the plaintiffs at the trial.

    TENGKU MARIAM'S CASE

  20. The main issue then is whether the wakaf is void under Muslim law. It was contended by the plaintiffs that it is void on the authority of the Federal Court’s decision in Commissioner for Religious Affairs v Tengku Mariam [1970] 1 MLJ 222. That case also dealt with a wakaf created over the remaining undivided share of the Chenderong Concession. Briefly, in that case the Mufti issued a fetua (ruling) under the provisions of the Administration of Islamic Law Enactment that the wakaf was valid but Wan Suleiman J (as he then was) held that the wakaf was invalid: Tengku Mariam Tengku Sri Wa Raja v Commissioner for Religious Affairs Trengganu [1969] 1 MLJ 110. On appeal the Federal Court held that although the wakaf was invalid, the parties were estopped from challenging its validity as they or their predecessors had agreed to abide by the decision of the Mufti.

    MUSLIM LAW ON WAKAF

  21. In the course of his judgment in Tengku Mariam’s case, Tun Azmi LP (as he then was) said:

    Perhaps I should say a few words in reference to the judgments of the Privy Council in the Indian case of Abdul Fata Mohamed Ishak v Russomoy Dhur Chowdhry and the Kenyan case of Fatuma Mohamed v Mohamed Salim. In the Indian case the facts were that two Muslim brothers made a wakaf whereby they themselves were to be the first mutawallis of the wakaf. The entire benefit of the wakaf was to go to their children in the first instance and their descendants from generation to generation until the total extinction of the family. Thereafter the income of the wakaf was to be applied to the benefit of widows, orphans, beggars and the poor.

    The results of their Lordships’ judgment was that a wakaf was valid only if the effect of the deed of wakaf was to give the property in substance to charitable uses. It was not valid if wakaf was founded ‘for the aggrandisement of the family’ or where the gifts to a charity was illusory or merely nominal. This decision created a storm in India as it was deemed to go against the fundamental notions of Islamic law. Finally the Indian legislature stepped in by passing the Mussalman Wakaf Validating Act 1913, which provides that wakafs for the support of a man’s descendants and family are proper and lawful and where the person creating the wakaf is a Hanafi Mussalman, it is also lawful for him to provide for his maintenance and support during his lifetime or for payments of his debts out of the rents and profits of the property dedicated, provided that in both cases the ultimate benefit is expressly or impliedly reserved for the poor or for any other purpose recognised by the Mussalman law as a religious, pious or charitable purpose of a permanent character.

    In 1951 their Lordships of the Privy Council in the Kenyan case of Fatuma Mohamed v Mohamed Salim followed their own decision in the Indian case of Abdul Fata Mohamed Ishak v Russomoy Dhur Chowdhry. Lord Simonds delivering the judgment of their Lordships cited a passage in the judgment of Hamilton J in another East African case of Talibu Mwijaka v Executors of Siwa Haji Decd. I will now cite only a part of the passage: –

    A study of the question shows that while the Mohamedan law, uninfluenced from outside sources, permitted perpetuities and the erection of wakafs for family aggrandizement solely, the influence of English judges and of the Privy Council has gradually encroached on this position until decisions given quite recently have decided that such wakafs are illegal, and it has now been clearly established that a wakaf for family aggrandizement or security, the ultimate beneficiaries of which are the poor, whether mentioned by name or supplied by implication, are invalid. The Mohamedan law in East Africa has, however, not been subjected to, the same modifying influence as in India, and remains the same as when the Min Haj was written in the sixth century of the Hejira.

    Lord Simonds in reference to the above among other things says this:–

    But they cannot accept the theory which appears to underlie his (Hamilton J’s) decision, that the interpretation of Mohamedan law given by this Board in a series of cases is confined to that law as applied or administered in India. On the contrary, it has not been suggested that, apart from the differences existing among the Shafi, Hanafi and other sects, which have no present significance, Mohamedan law is not the same in East Africa as in India. The appellants have themselves relied on its universality and invoke the text of the Koran and the writings of learned commentators who expounded the law not of East Africa or any part of it but of the whole Muslim world. In these circumstances their Lordships are as little justified in reviewing Abdul Fata’s case in an appeal from the courts of Kenya as they would be in an appeal (if that were now possible) from the courts of India. In Said Muhammad v Wakaf Commissioner already referred to, the experienced judges of the Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa not doubt that on a question of Mohamedan law decisions of the Privy Council in appeals from India must bind them in appeals from the High Court of Zandibar. Their Lordships are of opinion that this was clearly the correct view and that it must prevail also in appeals from Kenya.

    The effect of the above would be that the Malaysian courts would also be bound by the judgment of the Privy Council in Abdul Fata’s case. Whether that state of affairs should continue or not is a matter for the legislature.

    FETUA

  22. In the instant case a fetua was also issued by the Mufti declaring the first plaintiff’s wakaffetua nor is there any agreement that any of them would abide by it. The plaintiffs contend that the fetua does not apply to this case as the second plaintiffs are not Muslims. The defendants, however, rely on the fetua as part of the defence. As far as this case is concerned, the court is bound by the decision of the Federal Court in Tengku Mariam’s case in that the court is not bound by the fetua and as neither of the parties requested for such a fetua they too are not bound by it. valid but with this difference: neither of the parties requested for the

    VALIDATION

  23. The question arises whether the Muslim Law on wakaf in Trengganu has changed since Tengku Mariam’s case. The two Federal Court decision was delivered on 9 February 1970. Both Tun Azmi LP and Suffian FJ (as he then was) said that it was up to the legislature to effect any change. It would appear that the legislature did indeed do so. On 22 July 1972 the State Legislative Assembly of Trengganu passed the Islamic Wakaf Validating Enactment, 1972 which became law on 8 August 1972. Section 2 of the said Enactment reads:

    2.

    (1)

    It shall be lawful for any Muslim to create a Wakaf which in all other respects is in accordance with the provisions of Islamic Law, for the following amongst other purposes:

    (a)

    For the maintenance and support wholly or partially of his family, children or descendants, and

    (b)

    Where a person creating a Wakaf desires to follow the Hanafi Sect in respect of Wakaf, also for his own maintenance and support during his life-time and for the payment of his debt out of the rents and profits of the property dedicated.

    Provided that the ultimate benefit is in such wakaf expressly and impliedly reserved for the poor or for any other purpose recognised by Islamic Law as a religious, pious or charitable purpose of a permanent character.

    (2)

    No such wakaf shall be deemed to be invalid merely because the benefits reserved therein for the poor or other religious, pious or charitable purpose of a permanent character is small or not substantial or is postponed until after the extinction of the family, children or descendants of the person creating the wakaf.

    (3)

    No such wakaf shall be deemed to be invalid merely because part of the benefits reserved therein is given to person or persons other than the family, children or descendants of the person creating the wakaf.

  24. It seems to me that the grounds relied upon by the plaintiffs that the wakaf is void have been completely nullified by the said Enactment. I therefore hold that the wakaf per se is valid.

    RETROSPECTIVE LEGISLATION

  25. The instrument creating the wakaf was made on 13 June 1961. The Islamic Wakaf Validating Enactment, 1972 became law on 8 August 1972 that is eleven years later and about two years after the commencement of these proceedings. The question arises whether the new law applies to wakaf created before 8 August 1972. The answer seems to lie in s 3 of the Validating Enactment which reads:

    3.

    This Enactment shall apply to all wakaf created in the State before its commencement:

    Provided that nothing therein contained shall be deemed in anyway to affect any rights, titles, obligation or liability already acquired, accrued or incurred before the commencement of this Enactment.

  26. There would appear to be a printing error in the proviso and “therein” should read “herein”. In my view the words of the Enactment are plain. It applies to all wakaf created in the State before its commencement. In the instant case the wakaf created by Tengku Nik Maimunah has been validated by s 3 but subject to rights, titles, obligation or liability created before 8 August 1972.

    EXTENT OF WAKAF

  27. The matter, however, does not end there for s 61 of the Administration of Islamic Law Enactment reads:

    61.

    Whether or not made by way of will or deathbed gift, no wakaf or nazar made after the commencement of this Enactment and involving more than one-third of the property of the person making the same shall be valid in respect of the excess beyond such one-third unless expressly sanctioned and validated by all beneficiaries.

  28. This Enactment came into force on 29 March 1956. The wakaf was created on 13 June 1961 and therefore s 61 applies. There has been no express sanction and validation of the wakaf by all the beneficiaries of Tengku Nik Maimunah. Apart from the Chenderong Concession she had other properties. It follows that only a third of her property as on 13 June 1961 is a valid wakaf.

  29. This means that her other property has first to be added to the Chenderong Concession and one third of the whole but consisting part of the Chenderong Concession only is subject to the wakaf.

  30. For these reasons, I declare that the wakaf created by Tengku Nik Maimunah on 13 June 1961 is valid to the extent of one third of her property as of that date.


Cases

Commissioner for Religious Affairs v Tengku Mariam [1970] 1 MLJ 222

Tengku Mariam v Commissioner for Religious Affairs, Trengganu [1969] 1 MLJ 110

Representations

Peter Mooney (Kirpal Singh Brar and Hassan Ishak with him) (M/s Kirpal Singh Brar & Co) for the plaintiff.

ST Chung (M/s Chung & Huang) for defendants 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 20.

Notes:-

This decision is also reported at [1979] 1 MLJ 257.


SUMBER : http://www.ipsofactoj.com/archive/1978/Part09/arc1978(09)-001.htm

Aidil Fitri 1431H

Berita Harian : BeritaUtama

BERIKAN SOKONGAN ANDA...

BERIKAN SOKONGAN ANDA...

HULURKAN SUMBANGAN ANDA....

HULURKAN SUMBANGAN ANDA....

At-tarikh

jam UMMI di KUANTAN

jam WALID di JUBAIL

About Me

My photo
I'm Sharifah Faridah Hanim Tengku Embong. A mother of 6 children. Currently as a teacher at SMK Paya Besar, Kuantan.

My School of Fish (Please click if u like 2 feed da fish...)

Warna-warna Kehidupan....

warna-warna hidup mu
mewarnai kebebasan
mencerna keceriaan
mendambakan kegembiraan
menjalari kehidupan samudera
menyusuri rahsia ciptaan Allah
namun
aku tetap kagum
hidup mu tidak pernah lemas
hatta secebis daging mu
tidak pernah terjejas
dek keasinan melaut menyelubungi mu
mampukah kita
menggarap kehidupan ini
seperti mu
untuk terus melangkah
bertahtakan
keimanan dan ketaqwaan

Hamster 'Abbas Punya

Nazirah punya turtle...

Said nak juga...

Merisik Khabar

Liku-liku Kehidupan


  • SK Sultan Sulaiman 2 (1974 - 1979)
  • MRSM K Trg (1980-1984) 3rd Batch
  • LCP, Azusa (1985)
  • Citrus College, Glendora (1986)
  • USC, LA (1986 - 1989) Class of 1989
  • SM Sultan Sulaiman, Kuala Terengganu
  • Sykt Limbongan Timor Sdn Bhd, K Trg
  • Syarikat Amsys Bhd, Penang
  • SM Sultan Ismail, Kemaman
  • SM Vokasional, Kemaman
  • MPKT Batu Rakit (1993 - 1994)
  • SM Vokasional, Kuala Terengganu
  • SM Seri Budiman, Kuala Terengganu
  • SMK Paya Besar, Kuantan

  • Blog Archive

    Rapuh by Opick

    Detik waktu terus berjalan
    Berhias gelap dan terang
    Suka dan duka
    Tangis dan tawa
    Tergores bagai lukisan

    Seribu mimpi berjuta sepi
    Hadir bagai teman sejati
    Di antara lelahnya jiwa
    Dalam resah dan air mata
    Ku persembahkan kepadaMu
    Yang terindah dalam hidupku

    Meski ku rapuh dalam langkah
    Kadang tak setia kepadaMu
    Namun cinta dalam jiwa
    Hanyalah padaMu

    Maafkanlah bila hati
    Tak sempurna mencintaiMu
    Dalam dada ku harap hanya
    Dirimu yang bertakhta

    Detik waktu terus berlalu
    Semua berakhir padaMu