IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2010 / 17TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 13002 of 2010(O) -------------------------- IA NO.3503/2007 IN OS.684/1999 of ADDL.MUNSIFF COURT, KANNUR .................... PETITIONER(S): 1ST DEFENDANT: ----------------------------- CHEMMARATHI, KOORUMMAL HOUSE, NEAR ANJAAM PEEDIKA, PALLERI DESOM, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.V.PREMCHAND RESPONDENT(S): PLAINTIFFS 1 TO 8 AND DEFENDANTS 2 TO 4: ------------------------------------------------- 1. MANDOM CHANDRI, KANNADIPARAMBA, KANNADIPARAMBA P.O., KANNUR. 2. AJITHA, KANNADIPARAMBA, KANNADIPARAMBA P.O., KANNUR. 3. REENA, KANNADIPARAMBA, KANNADIPARAMBA P.O., KANNUR. 4. REEJA, KANNADIPARAMBA, KANNADIPARAMBA P.O., KANNUR. 5. KOLLAPPALA KALLIANI, NARATH, NARATH P.O., KANNUR. 6. VANAJA, NARATH, NARATH P.O., KANNUR. 7. SUJATHA, NARATH, NARATH P.O., KANNUR. 8. SUMA, NARATH, NARATH P.O., KANNUR. 9. M.VINODAN, NOW RESIDING AT NARATH, NARATH P.O., KANNUR. 10. MANDOM SREEJA, KP.X/141, NEAR NOOMHERI L.P.SCHOOL, CHOLERI P.O., KANNUR. 11. K.BALAKRISHNAN, NOW RESIDING AT NARATH, NARATH P.O., KANNUR. ADV. SRI.RAMKUMAR NAMBIAR FOR R1 TO R5,7,8,10 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO13002/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PELIMINARY JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.6.2002 IN OS NO.684/1999 BEFORE THE ADDL.MUNSIFF COURT, KANNUR EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT DATED 25.6.2009 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 7.10.2009 TO SET ASIDE THE REPORT EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.3.2010 PASSED BY THE ADDL.MUNSIFF COURT, KANNUR IN IA NO.2764/2009 IN IA NO.3503/2007 IN OS NO.684/1999 BEFORE THE ADDL.MUNSIFF COURT, KANNUR. //TRUE COPY// THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.13002 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of June, 2010. JUDGMENT Writ petitioner is respondent No.1 in the final decree proceedings. He sought for setting aside the report and share list submitted by the Advocate Commissioner. That application was dismissed as per order dated 30.03.2010. That order is under challenge in this Writ Petition. 2. Grievance of petitioner is that the report and share list prepared by the Advocate Commissioner are not in accordance with direction contained in the preliminary decree. Learned counsel has referred me to clause (iv) of the preliminary decree which states that question regarding reservation of house whether “with or without valuation” is left open to be decided in the final decree. According to the learned counsel Advocate Commissioner has prepared the report and share list only with valuation of the house and a share list without valuation of the house is not prepared. Yet another objection is that though there are various valuable improvements in the property, its value is assessed without the assistance of an expert. I have heard counsel on both sides. 3. So far as the objection to the valuation made by the Advocate Commissioner regarding improvements in the property is concerned, it is open to the petitioner to adduce evidence in support of his contention. It is not necessary to set aside or remit the report of the Advocate Commissioner on that WP(C) No.13002/2010 2 ground. 4. So far as complaint that no report and share list without valuation of the house is prepared in view of clause (iv) of the preliminary decree is concerned, I find merit in that contention. The Advocate Commissioner has to prepare report and share list also without valuation of the house so that the court dealing with the application for final decree can decide on the reservation of the house in question with or without valuation. As such, the order under challenge to the extent it concerned clause (iv) of the preliminary decree is set aside. The report and share list submitted by the Advocate Commissioner shall be remitted to the Commissioner to prepare a report and share list without valuation of the house in question as well. Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks