IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DECEMBER 2009 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 35281 of 2009(O) ---------------------------------------- OS.100/2005 of MUNSIFF COURT, PAYYANNUR .................... PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. MEETHALE ILLATH SANKARAN NAMBOODIRI, S/O. KRISHNAN NAMBOODIRI, AGED 69 YEARS, SANTHI, KANKOLE.P.O, KANKOLE AMSOM DESOM, TALIPARAMBA TALUK. 2. MEETHALE ILLATH BHARGAVI ANTHERJANAM, W/O. KRISHNAN NAMBOODIRI, AGED 57 YEARS, KANKOLE.P.O, KANKOLE AMSOM DESOM, TALIPARAMBA TALUK. BY ADV. MR.V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. MEETHALE ILLATH NARAYANAN NAMBOODIRI, S/O. LATE KRISHNAN NAMBOODIRI, AGED 78 YEARS, KANKOLE.P.O, KANKOLE AMSOM DESOM, TALIPARAMBA TALUK. 2. MEETHALE ILLATH EASWARAN NAMBOODIRI, S/O. LATE KRISHNAN NAMBOODIRI, AGED 67 YEARS, RETIRED TEACHER, KANKOLE.P.O, KANKOLE AMSOM DESOM, TALIPARAMBA TALUK. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.35281 OF 2009 -------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of December 2009 ---------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Petitioners are the plaintiffs in O.S No. 100 Of 2005 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Payyannur. Suit is for fixation of boundary as per the description of the property given in the partition deed entered by the parties, and the respondents are the defendants. Suit claim was resisted by the defendants by filing a written statement. On the application moved by the plaintiffs, an advocate commissioner was deputed to measure out the property and file a report and plan. Report and plan so filed by the advocate commissioner with the assistance of a surveyor was remitted pursuant to the objections raised by the defendants. Fresh report and plan submitted by the advocate commissioner after conducting local inspection and measuring out the property again was objected to by the petitioner/plaintiffs contending that there are some W.P.(C).No.35281 OF 2009 glaring defects in that report and plan. The learned Munsiff after hearing the counsel on both sides with reference to the objections raised by the plaintiffs negatived the challenges raised to the report and plan vide Ext.P5 order. Propriety and correctness of that order is challenged in the writ petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Having regard to the submissions made and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented, I find no notice to the respondents is necessary and hence it is dispensed with . The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the case has been included in the special list for trial tomorrow. It is also seen from Ext.P5 order that the court below passed that order on 08/10/2009. In exercise of the supervisory jurisdiction it is not proper and appropriate for this court to examine the merit of a commission report collected in a suit, the evaluation of which necessarily has to W.P.(C).No.35281 OF 2009 be done with reference to other materials also tendered in the case. A commission report is after all a piece of evidence which is intended to enable the court to adjudicate the disputes arising in a suit or proceeding. It is seen from Ext.P5 order that the commissioner who prepared the report and the surveyor who assisted the commissioner in measuring out the property and also in preparing the plan have not been examined by the petitioners/plaintiffs to substantiate their objections. In case the petitioners take steps for examining the commissioner and also the surveyor within one week from the date of this judgment, the court below shall give them an opportunity to do so. I direct the court below to adjourn the trial of the case for a period of ten days without removing the case from the list to provide an opportunity to the petitioners to take steps for examination of the advocate commissioner and also the surveyor to substantiate their objections. In the event of petitioner taking steps, the court below shall consider the objections to the commissioner report and plan with W.P.(C).No.35281 OF 2009 reference to the evidence of the commissioner and also surveyor, untrammelled by any of the observations made in Ext.P5 order. Subject to the observations made above, the writ petition is disposed. Hand over a copy of the judgment to the counsel. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE vdv