IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2009 / 28TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 29422 of 2009(O) -------------------------- OS.795/2000 of II ADDL.M.C.,NEYYATTINKARA .................... PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. SREEKRISHNARU,S/O.KRISHNARU, RESIDING AT MULLASSERI MADOM, KUNNATHUKAL,NEYYATTINKARA TALUK. 2. DEVAKI ANTHERJANAM,W/O.SREEKRISHNARU, RESIDING AT MULLASSERI MADOM, KUNNATHUKAL,NEYYATTINKARA TALUK. 3. MANOJ,S/O.SREEKRISHNARU, RESIDING AT MULLASSERI MADOM, KUNNATHUKAL,NEYYATTINKARA TALUK. BY ADV. MR.R.S.KALKURA RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. VISWAMBHARAN PILLAI, S/O.PARAMESWARAN PILLAI,RESIDING AT PARAMBATHALA VEEDU,KUNNATHUKAL P.O., NEYYATTINKARA TALUK. 2. RADHAMMA,D/O.BHARGAVI AMMA, RESIDING AT PARAMBATHALA VEEDU,KUNNATHUKAL P.O., NEYYATTINKARA TALUK. 3. SREEDEV,S.P.BHAVAN, KRISHNAMANGALAM,NOW RESIDING AT PARAMBATHALA VEEDU,KUNNATHUKAL P.O.,NEYYATTINKARA TALUK. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.29422 of 2009 - O --------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after setting aside the commission report in the suit O.S.No.275 of 2008 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Neyyattinkara the court has ordered for a fresh commission seeking a fresh report and plan. That being so, the writ petition challenging the order passed by the court below declining the request of the plaintiff to withdraw the suit canvassing the reason that survey records are not available to identify the property on the face of it, cannot be entertained. But, I make it clear that Ext.P15 order challenged passed over the petition for withdrawal of the suit filed by the petitioner/plaintiff will not stand in his way in moving an application afresh for the same relief if it turns out after filing of the fresh commission report that identification of the property cannot be made due to the absence of relevant survey records. Reserving the right of the petitioner to move such an application afresh, subject to what is stated above, the writ petition is closed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. bkn/-