IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 21ST AUGUST 2009 / 30TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 23746 of 2009(O) --------------------------------------- OS.NO.384/2006 OF MUNSIFF COURT, MAVELIKKARA. .................... PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. KOCHUKUNJU,S/O.THEVAN,VADAKKE VEETTIL, KALLUKUZHY VADAKKETHIL,PONAKAM MURIYIL, THEKKEKARA VILLAGE. 2. CHELLAMMA, D/O. THEVAN, VADAKKE VEETTIL, KALLUKUZHY VADAKKETHIL, PONAKAM MURIYIL, THEKKEKARA VILLAGE. 3. PONNAMMA, D/O. THEVAN,VADAKKE VEETTIL, KALLUKUZHY VADAKKETHI, PONAKAM MURIYIL, THEKKEKARA VILLAGE. BY ADV. MR.SAJITH KUMAR V. RESPONDENTS/ DEFENDANTS IN O.S: ------------------------------------------------------- 1. KUNJAMMA, VADAKKE VEETTIL, PONAKAM MURIYIL, THEKKEKARA VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA. 2. KUMARAN @ SUKUMARAN, S/O.SUKUMARAN, VADAKKE VEETTIL, PONAKAM MURIYIL, THEKKEKARA VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/08/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C).No.23746 OF 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of August 2009 ------------------------------------- JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs. i) Issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Ext.P1. ii) Grant such other reliefs as may be prayed for and as the Court may deem fit to grant. iii) Grant the cost of this writ petition. W.P.(C).No.23746 OF 2009 Page numbers 2. Petitioners are the plaintiffs in O.S No. 384 of 2006 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Mavelikkara. Suit is for fixing up of boundary and for consequential injunction, and the respondents are the defendants in the suit . An advocate commissioner was appointed to measure out the property with the assistance of a surveyor. After such inspection and measurement, the advocate commissioner filed a report and a plan. Defendants filed objections to that report and plan. The learned Munsiff after hearing the counsel on both sides and considering the objections raised, passed Ext.P1 order remitting the report and plan with certain directions in locating and identifying the suit properties. Impeaching the propriety and correctness of Ext.P1 order, petitioners have filed this writ petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. W.P.(C).No.23746 OF 2009 Page numbers 3. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. Having regard to the submissions made and taking note of the facts and circumstance presented with reference to Ext.P1 order impugned in the writ petition, I find no notice to the respondents is necessary and it is dispensed with. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners / plaintiffs are satisfied with the report, and, if at all the commission report and plan are liable to be remitted, the execution of the work can be done only by the same commissioner and surveyor. I cannot agree. After going through Ext.P1 order, I find, the learned Munsiff after meticulously considering and appreciating the merit of the report and plan in the light of the objections raised by the respondents has come to the conclusion that the report and plan contain serious infirmities. I do not want to advert to the infirmities noted by the W.P.(C).No.23746 OF 2009 Page numbers Munsiff which prima facie appears to be tenable and acceptable. When that be so, I find no reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Munsiff. Writ petition lacks merits, and it is dismissed. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE vdv