IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2009 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 16633 of 2009(O) --------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17/03/2009 IN IA 1149/2009 IN OS.586/2006 of ADDL.MUNSIFF COURT, KOLLAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- SHEELA, W/O.RAMACHANDRAN, ROSHINI, AKSHAYA NAGAR, KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM-8. BY ADV. MR.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. MOTHY, VEENA, MANGARATHOPE,PAPPANAMCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. JWALA SUDHEER,REPRESENTED BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER RAMACHANDRAN, ROSHINI, AKSHAYA NAGAR,KADAPPAKKADA,KOLLAM. 3. T. MOHAN DAS,CHIRAYIL HOUSE, KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM. 4. T.SHAJIMON,CHIRAYIL HOUSE,KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM. 5. T. DEEPAK,CHIRAYIL HOUSE,KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.16633 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 16th June, 2009 JUDGMENT The Writ Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs: 1. To call for the records leading to the petitioners case from the court below and quash Ext.P7 order in I.A.No.1149/09 in O.S.No.586/06 of the Additional Munsiff Court, Kollam. 2. To set aside Ext.P7 impugned order in I.A.No.119/09 in O.S.No.586/06 of the Additional Munsiff Court, Kollam and to sustain Exts.P3 and P4 orders. 3. issue such other reliefs as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 2. Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.586/06 on the file of the Additional Munsiff Court, Kollam and the respondents, the defendants in the suit. In the application moved by the respondents, the learned Munsiff passed Ext.P7 order removing the commissioner appointed in the suit holding that on the facts and circumstances involved in the case it was necessary to meet the ends of justice. The plans prepared by the commissioner twice, it was noticed by the court, were unacceptable. There was also an allegation that the W.P.C.No.16633/09 - 2 - commissioner did not produce a plan prepared by the surveyor deputed to assist him, before the court. In that backdrop, it appears, taking note of those circumstances, the learned Munsiff passed the order removing the commissioner. The plaintiff has now come up with this petition impeaching the correctness and propriety of that order invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested by this court under Article 227 of the Constitution. From the submissions made and taking note of the facts and circumstances, I find no impropriety in the order passed by the learned Munsiff ordering the removal of the commissioner. This court in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution cannot sit in judgment over such an order passed by the learned Munsiff which on the facts presented cannot be taken as perverse or illegal. The Writ Petition is dismissed. srd S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE