IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH AUGUST 2011 / 26TH SRAVANA 1933 OP(C).No. 2718 of 2011(O) ------------------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20/07/2011 IN IA NO. 555/2011 IN OS.313/2005 of MUNSIFF COURT, HOSDRUG .................... PETITIONER -------------------- P.C.SUBRAHMANYAN ADIYODI, S/O.K.BHASKARAN NAMBIAR,AGED 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT VIDYANAGAR,KASARAGOD VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.M.M.ANTO SRI.GEORGE MATHEWS RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. CHERAVAKKATH MADATHIL THANKAMANI, W/O.NARAYANAN NAMBISAN,AGED 53 YEARS, 'SANKARABHAVANAM',KAITHAPRAM,PANAPUZHA VILLAGE, P.O.MATHAMANGALAM,KANNUR DISTRICT- 678 001. 2. ADUKKADUKKAM VEETIL THULASI, D/O. SUBRAMANYAM ADIYODI, RESIDING AT VIDYANAGAR, KASARAGOD VILLAGE,KASARAGOD TALUK- 671 121. 3. GANGADHARAN, S/O.NARAYAN NAIR, RESIDING AT ADAKAM,KALLAR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK,P.O. RAJAPURAM- 671 532. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss OPC. NO.2718/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS. 313/2005 DTD. 30.8.2005 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, HOSDURG. P2:- COPY OF THE IA. 2491/2010 DTD. 15.11.2010 IN OS.313/05 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, HOSDURG. P3:- COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT DTD 22.2.2011 FILED BY THE DEFENDANT NO. 1 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, HOSDURG. P4:- COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT AND PLAN DTD. 24.8.2009. P5:- COPY OF THE IA. 555/11 DTD. 22.2.2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, HOSDURG. P6:- COPY OF THE PLAN CONTAINING PRIVATE SURVEY. P7:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT.D 20.7.2011 IN IA.555/11 IN OS. 313/05 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, HOSDURG. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- O.P(C).No.2718 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 17th day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT First defendant in O.S.No.313 of 2005 of the Court of learned Munsiff, Hosdurg is the petitioner before me challenging Ext.P7, order on I.A.No.555 of 2011 refusing to remit report and plan to the Advocate Commissioner on a third occasion. First respondent filed the suit for a decree for prohibitory injunction. The Advocate Commissioner submitted report and plan which were remitted. There was a further remission as well. Thereafter Advocate Commissioner submitted report and plan on 24.08.2008. To that report and plan petitioner filed objection in the form of I.A.No.555 of 2011 with a request to set aside the report and plan. Main reasons stated are that the plots drawn by the surveyor are irregular in shape and since the cross measurements are not given, extent of property cannot be calculated. The above objections did not find favour with learned Munsiff who dismissed I.A.No.555 of 2011 observing that if petitioner is aggrieved, he can very well prove his case by examining the Advocate Commissioner during trial. Learned counsel submitted that the ex parte order against petitioner was O.P(C).No.2718 of 2011 -: 2 :- set aside only on 18.11.2010 and immediately thereafter, he has taken steps to file I.A.No.555 of 2011. 2. Even then, I must bear in mind that the ex parte order against petitioner was set aside on 18.11.2010 and I.A.No.555 of 2011 to set aside the report and plan dated 24.08.2009 was filed only on 22.02.2011. I do not find reason to interfere with the order under challenge particularly since the right of petitioner to prove his grievance against the report and plan in the course of trial is reserved in Ext.P7, order. This original petition is dismissed without prejudice to that right of petitioner. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-