IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 21ST OCTOBER 2008 / 29TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 30498 of 2008(E) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 02/09/2008 IN IA 1517/08 IN OS.317/1994 of MUNSIFF COURT, VAIKOM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. MOHANAN S/O. RAGHAVAN, VALIYAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, KUDAVECHOOR, VECHOOR VILLAGE VAIKOM TALUK. 2. SUBHASH, S/O.RAGHAVAN -DO- -DO- 3. PONNAPPAN, S/O. RAGHAVAN -DO- -DO- 4. RADHAPPAN, S/O. RAGHAVAN -DO- -DO- 5. IJAPPAN S/O. RAGHAVAN -DO- -DO- 6. BOSE, S/O. RAGHAVAN, -DO- -DO- 7. SUDHARMA,D/O. RAGHAVAN -DO- -DO- 8. ROYMON S/O.RAGHAVAN -DO- -DO- BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE JOSEPH (ITTANKULANGARA) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. RAMDAS S/O. KESAVAN, SALEEM SADANATHIL HOUSE, KUDAVECHOOR P.O., VECHOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK. 2. MADHAVI @ MANKA, W/O. KESAVAN MAPPILA VALIYAPARAMBIL ACHINAKOM, KUDAVECHOOR P.O., VECHOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK. 3. SIVARAJAN, S/O. KESAVAN, SANOJ BHAVAN, ACHINAKOM, KUDAVECHOOR, VECHOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK. 4. PEETHAMBARAN, S/O. KESAVAN, SEEMA BHAVAN, ACHINAKOM BHAGOM KUDAVECHOOR KARA, VECHOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK. 5. PONNAPPAN S/O. KESAVAN, MAPPILA VALIYAPARAMBIL, KUDAVECHOOR, VECHOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.30498 of 2008 E -------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of October, 2008. JUDGMENT Heard. 2. Petitioners are plaintiffs in O.S.No.317 of 1994 of Munsiff's Court, Vaikom which is a suit for fixation of boundary, injunction and other reliefs. That suit was dismissed against which petitioners filed A.S.No.245 of 2005 in the District Court, Kottayam. Learned District Judge set aside Exts.C2 and C2(a), commission report and plan in that case and remanded the case to the trial court for fresh disposal with a direction to measure the entire 1.64 acres in survey No.514/17/1 in which petitioners as well as respondents claimed title and possession. After remand, Advocate Commissioner and Taluk Surveyor were appointed. Respondents filed work memo requesting that their property also be measured, its southern boundary as per the fence may be indicated and that Commissioner may report on other matters requested by the respondents. That work memo was allowed by learned Munsiff. It is in challenge of that, petitioners have approached this Court with this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution. Learned counsel contends that work memo submitted by the respondents is clearly against the directions contained in the remand judgment. Learned counsel referred me to paragraph 11 of the remand judgment. WP(C)No.30498/2008 2 3. Petitioners and respondents claim title and possession over their respective properties which are comprised in the 1.64 acres in survey No.514/17/1. Learned District Judge has set aside Exts.C2 and C2(a), commission report and plan. Learned District Judge also directed that for proper adjudication of the dispute between the parties, entire property extending to 1.64 acres in survey No.514/17/1 including portions already assigned has to be measured with the assistance of Taluk Surveyor. Necessarily that includes the property of the respondents as well. Therefore, there is nothing illegal or wrong in the respondents requesting that their property also be measured and shown in the plan. 4. The next objection is that respondents have asked for identifying the boundary on the south of their property which according to them is a fence. Learned counsel contends that the attempt of the respondents is to fabricate evidence. It is also contended that the said act is beyond the scope of the remand judgment. 5. I am not going into the question in this proceedings whether it is necessary to identify the southern boundary of property of the respondents in the light of remand judgment. Petitioners will have an opportunity to file their objections to the report and plan. I only make it clear that the report and plan prepared as per the work memo submitted by respondents will be considered WP(C)No.30498/2008 3 by the learned Munsiff at the appropriate stage in the light of the objection that may be raised by the petitioners. No interference is called for in exercise of the power under Article 227 of the Constitution. With the above observations, Writ Petition is dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE. cks