IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 30TH OCTOBER 2009 / 8TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 30692 of 2009(O) -------------------------- OS.279/2006 of MUNSIFF COURT,VARKALA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- PURUSHOTHAMAN NAIR, S/O. SANKARA PILLAI S., S.P.VIHAR, VENKULAM, EDAVA VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.R.ANILKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SURENDRAN NAIR, S/O. NEELAKANTA PILLAI, NDSL VIHAR, VENKULAM, EDAVA VILLAGE, EDAVA P.O., (VIA) VARKALA, TRIVANDRUM. 2. LALITHA SURENDRAN NAIR, D/O. KOCHUNARAYANA PILLAI, NDSL VIHAR, VENKULAM, EDAVA VILLAGE, EDAVA P.O., (VIA) VARKALA, TRIVANDRUM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 30692 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 30th October, 2009 JUDGMENT The Writ Petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: 1. To issue appropriate writ, direction or order to call for the records in O.S.No.279/06 in the Munsiff's Court, Varkala and quash Ext.P6 order in I.A.No.64709 in O.S.No.279/06 in the Munsiff's Court, Varkala and direct the court to examine the Advocate Commissioner and Surveyor to decide the validity of Commission Report as preliminary issue. 2. To issue such other writ, direction or order directing the Munsiff's Court, Varkala to hear the validity of the Commission Report as a preliminary issue prior to the final decision of the Original Suit No.279/06. 2. Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.279 of 2006 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Varkala. Suit is one for perpetual prohibitory injunction, and the respondents are the defendants. At the instance of the petitioner/plaintiff, an Advocate Commissioner conducted local inspection and filed a report ascertaining the matters sought for. Plaintiff filed objection to that report. Plaintiff also moved an application to set aside the commission report. P5 is the copy of that application. The learned Munsiff, after hearing both sides, dismissed W.P.C.No.30692/09 - 2 - that application vide P6 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. 3. 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. Learned Munsiff has dismissed P5 application filed by the plaintiff for remitting the commission report, reserving the right of the petitioner to challenge the report in trial. It is also stated in the order that the case has been now posted for recording evidence. Petitioner can take steps for examining the commissioner to substantiate the objections raised against his report. Needless to point out, if any of the objections raised by the petitioner is substantiated after examining the commissioner, and the court finds that the report suffers from any infirmity warranting its setting aside or remission, appropriate orders has to be passed in accordance with law. Reserving the right of the petitioner to challenge the report by examining the commissioner in trial, if so advised, the writ petition is closed. srd S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE W.P.C.No.30692/09 - 3 -