IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 18TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 27TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 23508 of 2008(W) -------------------------- OS.61/2001 of PRL.SUB COURT,IRINJALAKUDA .................... PETITIONER: ------------ PAILAPPAN, 53 YEARS S/O.KOCHUVAREED, KIRISINGAL HOUSE PALLIPURAM, KODUNGALLUR THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN RESPONDENT: ------------- JOSE, S/O.THOMAS, KUNNATHUR HOUSE PALLIPURAM, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR. BY /- THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.RAMKUMAR, J. ==================== W.P.(C).No. of 23508 2008 =========================== Dated this the 18th day of September, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner who is the plaintiff in O.S.No.61 of 2001 on the file of the Principal Sub court, Irinjalakuda, is the writ petitioner. This suit is for recovery of possession of plaint B schedule property alleged to be the north eastern portion of the plaint A schedule. At the instance of the plaintiff/petitioner, a commission was taken out and the commissioner filed a plan and report as per which the plaint schedule property is identified as plots A and B of which plot A which admeasures 1.04 cents is identified as the area trespassed upon. 2. After the report and plan of the commissioner, the defendant filed I.A.No.3240/07 for setting aside the same. The plaintiff also filed I.A.No.3835/07 for remitting the report and plan to the commissioner. The apprehension of the petitioner is that the defendant is also claiming title over a larger extent of property comprised in the very same survey number, namely, Sy.No.285/7 of Pallipuram Village. The suit being one for W.P.(C).No. of 23508 2008 2 recovery, the plaintiff has to stand on fall on the strength of his evidence of title. According to the petitioner, the report and plan of the commissioner support the plaint allegations. If as a matter of fact, the defendant has claimed title over any portion of plaint A schedule property, it is for the defendant to take out a commission to establish the same and in the event of defendant putting forward a rival title, the court will have to adjudicate on the prima facie title of the rival claimants. In that view of the matter, I do not find any ground to interfere with that part of Ext.P2 common order dated 27.6.2008 passed in I.A.3835/07 filed by the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of as above. V.RAMKUMAR JUDGE. bkn/-