IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS THURSDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1933 CRP.No. 797 of 2000(E) ---------------------- (AGAINST THE ORDER ON I.A.7492/99 IN O.S.450/97 MUNSIFF COURT-1, KOZHIKODE) REVN. PETITIONER/PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF IN O.S.: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ PARAMBILEDATH CHANDRAN, S/O.KANDAKUTTY, AGED 46 YEARS NEW PUSHPARAJ HOTEL COURT ROAD, CALICUT - 1. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.BALASUBRAMANYAN SRI. NIRMAL SACHEENDRAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS: ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. K.P.SUJALA D/O.KUNHIKANNAN KIZHEKKENCHALIL HOUSE PALAYATTUNADA, VADAKARA 2. V. VENUGOPALAN S/O.SHANKARAN HOTEL KRISHNADAS, COURT ROAD, CALICUT - 1. ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/11/2011, THE COURT ON 17/11/2011 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS J., - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C.R.P. No.797 of 2000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of November, 2011 ORDER This C.R.P. is filed by the petitioner/plaintiff in I.A. No.7492 of 1999 in O.S. No.450 of 1997 on the file of Munsiff Court-1, Kozhikode. Respondents 1 and 2 herein are the respondents/defendants in that I.A. which was filed by the petitioner to appoint another advocate Commissioner. 2. The facts of the case are briefly as follows. O.S. No.450 of 1997 on the file of Munsiff Court-1, Kozhikode is a suit for injunction. The Commissioner appointed by the Court below originally filed a report and a sketch. Since the Commissioner omitted to note certain important aspects C.R.P. No.797 of 2000 -: 2 :- relevant for the proper adjudication of the suit, the petitioner filed I.A. No. 3547 of 1998 for remitting the commissioner's report and sketch. The Court below dismissed the said petition and the petitioner filed a revision petition before this Court as C.R.P. No. 56 of 1999. 3. After hearing the parties this Court allowed I.A. No. 3547 of 1998 and directed the Court below to remit the report and plan to the same Commissioner for proper identification of the plaint schedule property. When the report and plan were remitted to the Commissioner, the Commissioner filed a report before the Court below for direction on the ground that subsequent to the filing of the earlier report and before the same was remitted to her she had accepted the vakalath of the second respondent in other connected suit pending before the Sub Court and as such, as to whether she should proceed with the work or return the warrant un-executed. On receipt of the notice of the said report the petitioner filed I.A. No. 7492 of 1999 for passing orders for appointing another commissioner to C.R.P. No.797 of 2000 -: 3 :- submit further report and plan. The petitioner apprehended that the Commissioner will not be able to do justice in the above matter. 4. When this Court directed the Court below to remit the Commissioner's plan and report, the petitioner was not aware of the fact that the Commissioner had been engaged by the second respondent in a connected suit. 5. The revision petitioner alleges that the Court below without considering I.A. on merits dismissed the petition and the same Commissioner was appointed. Against that order, the petitioner/plaintiff filed this C.R.P. 6. Heard learned counsel for the revision petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 7. At the time of argument, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that they have no objection in appointing another advocate commissioner by allowing I.A. No. 7492 of 1999. C.R.P. No.797 of 2000 -: 4 :- 8. Accordingly this C.R.P. is allowed and the order in I.A. No.7492 of 1999 in O.S. No. 450 of 1997 on the file of Munsiff Court-1, Kozhikode is set aside and that I.A. is allowed and the Court below is directed to appoint another Advocate Commissioner. There is no order as to costs. M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, (JUDGE) dl/