IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2008 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 9896 of 2008(C) ------------------------- OS.113/2007 of ADDL.M.C.,KOZHIKODE-I .................... PETITIONERS: ---------------------- 1. P.SOUMINI, D/O.SANKARAN, AGED 64, RESIDING AT PUTHOOR NIVAS, KARAPARAMBA, KOZHIKODE - 10. 2. ANOOPKUMAR.P., S/O.LATE P.KUNHANDI, AGED 34, RESIDING AT PUTHOOR NIVAS, KARAPPARAMBA, KOZHIKODE - 10. 3. VINOD KUMAR P., S/O.LATE P.KUNHANDI, AGED 31, RESIDING AT PUTHOOR NIVAS, KARAPPARAMBA, KOZHIKODE - 10. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.MOHAMMED NIAS RESPONDENT: ----------------------- C.K.SHAHEEDA, D/O.U.K.ABOOBACKER, W/O.P.C.BASHEER, AGED 40, RESIDING AT BREEZE, ERANHIPALAM P.O., VENGERI VILLAGE, NEDUNGOTTOOR DESOM OF KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.C. NO. 9896 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 25th day of March, 2008. J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed against the order of the Addl. Munsiff-I, Kozhikode in I.A.842/08 in O.S.113/07. It was an application to set aside the Commissioner's plan and report. The Court below dismissed it on the ground that it is a belated application and it is filed only with intend to protract the matter. The suit is one for prohibitory and mandatory injunctions which involves violation of the building rules as well. 2. The learned counsel submits before me that the evidence has begun in this case and the Court has proceeded with the matter. If really the plan and report submitted by the Commissioner is not helpful to the Court for a proper finding, then essentially there is a duty cast upon the Court also to have proper particulars for a just decision in the case. Therefore I permit the writ petitioners herein to adduce W.P.C 9896 OF 2008 -:2:- evidence against the Commissioner's plan and report which they are attacking and if the Court is convinced that the said plan and report are not helpful to the Court for a proper disposal of the matter, then certainly the Court shall either remit or set aside the report, call for a new report and dispose of the matter in accordance with law. For the said purpose the plaintiff can recall himself and examine the Commissioner to prove the correctness of the report. Needless to say the other side must be permitted to adduce evidence in support of their respective contentions. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-