IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 10TH JULY 2008 / 19TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 20717 of 2008(N) -------------------------- OS.351/2001 of SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA .................... PETITIONER: ------------ SAM KOSHY, VILANILATHU HOUSE PERINGANADU , ADOOR. BY ADV. SRI.SUBHASH CYRIAC RESPONDENTS: ------------- GEORGE SAMUEL, VALUPARAMBIL RENY VILLA, KUNNAM P.O., THAZHAKARA VILLAGE. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.20717 of 2008 ------------------------------- Dated this the 10th July, 2008. J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the second defendant in O.S.No.351 of 2001, on the file of Sub Court, Mavelikkara. This petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging Ext.P6 order. Ext.P6 order is passed in an application filed by the petitioner to set aside the report submitted by the Commissioner. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was heard. 3. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that PW.5, the expert Engineer, who prepared Ext.C1(a) report did not properly value the building and depreciation was not given, and in such circumstances, learned Sub Judge was not justified in dismissing the application. On hearing the learned counsel and on going through Ext.P6 order, I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the impugned W.P.(C) No.20717/2008 2 order warranting interference. Petitioner is entitled to challenge the order along with the judgment, if it goes against him in the appeal. Petitioner is also entitled to challenge the report by adducing evidence before the court below. Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE nj.