IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2009 / 31ST ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 20315 of 2009(O) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA 659/09 IN OS.67/2008 of PRL.MUNSIFF COURT, KASARAGOD .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- K.R.SATHEESH KUMAR, S/O. H.RAJU, AGED 24 YEARS, R/AT KOOVARA, BEDAKAM IN BEDADUKKA VILLAGE, KUNDAMKUZHI, KASARAGOD TALUK. BY ADV.MR.KODOTH SREEDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- YUVACHETHANA ARTS AND SPORTS CLUB, KALICHANADUKKAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MAVILA MOHANAN NAMBIAR, BEDAKAM IN BEDADUKKA VILLAGE, KUNDAMKUZHI, KASARAGOD TALUK. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C).No.20315 OF 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of July 2009 ------------------------------------- JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to call for the records relating to Ext.P4 and issue: i) A writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction quashing Ext.P6 ii) A direction to the court below to allow Ext.P4 and stay of all further proceedings in O.S 67/2008 on the file of Principal Munsiff of Kasaragod. W.P.(C).No.20315 OF 2009 2 iii) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction as the Hon'ble Court may pleased to grant in the circumstances of the case. 2. Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S 67/2008 on the file of the Principal Munsiff Court, Kasaragod. Suit is one for a decree to direct the defendants to surrender the suit property after demolishing the structure put up by them in that property. Respondent is the defendant in the suit. On the application moved by the plaintiff an Advocate Commissioner was appointed and after conducting a local inspection with the assistance of a surveyor, he prepared and submitted a report and a plan. Plaintiff has serious objections to that report and plan, and filing his objections he applied for remitting the report and plan for considering the points raised by him. The learned Munsiff after hearing both sides dismissed that application by Ext.P6 order. Propriety and correctness of Ext.P6 order is challenged in the W.P.(C).No.20315 OF 2009 3 petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Having regard to the submissions made and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented and with reference to Ext.P6 order impugned in the petition I find no notice to the respondents is necessary and it is dispensed with. Perusing Ext.P6 order it is seen, no opportunity is provided to the petitioner/ plaintiff to substantiate his objections by examining the commissioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after filing of the report the case has not come up in the list for trial. To dispose of the objections raised by the plaintiff without affording him an opportunity to examine the commissioner may cause him great injustice. That being so, I direct the learned Munsiff to give an opportunity to the plaintiff to substantiate his W.P.(C).No.20315 OF 2009 4 objections, at the trial of the suit, by examining the commissioner and also the surveyor, if sought for, and in case the objections are found sustainable needless to point out the court has to pass appropriate orders on his request for remitting the report and plan. Ext.P6 order, then, will not stand in the way of the court in passing appropriate orders. Subject to the above observations the writ petition is closed. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE vdv