IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 7TH JANUARY 2008 / 17TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 697 of 2008(G) ---------------------------------- PETITIONERS: -------------------- 1. MANHAKKUNNU KAMALAKSHI, AGED 70 YEARS, W/O.LATE BHASKARAN, KUNNATHUR HOUSE, P.O.KADACHIRA 2. CHITHRALEKHA, D/O.LATE BHASKARAN -DO-DO- 3. CHANDRI OF -DO-. 4. SUKANYA OF -DO-. 5. SULEKHA OF -DO-. 6. JAGJEEVAN, S/O.LATE BHASKARAN OF -DO-. 7. SUJNA, D/O. OF -DO- -DO-. 8. JAGADHEESH, S/O. OF -DO-. BY ADV. SRI.V.RAJAGOPAL RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. LEELA, PANNIYAN HOUSE, PALLIKKUNNU AMSOM, DESOM. 2. MOOLIYIL BHARGAVI, PRASANTHI, KANNUR. 3. KANAKAMMA, MOOLIYIL HOUSE, THAVAKKARA ROAD, KANNUR-2. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/01/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 697 OF 2008 --------------------- Dated this the 7th day of January, 2008 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is preferred against the order in IA 1445/07 in OS 125/72 whereby the court has rejected the prayer for remitting the Commissioner's plan and report. The contention of the applicants appear to be regarding allotment of a house in Item No.6, which according to them does not belong to the plaintiff at all and it has been constructed by their predecessor-in-interest . Therefore the mode suggested by the Commissioner cannot be accepted. 2. The question whether the said house is to be allotted to them or it can be allotted to the other party is a matter which requires evidence and the court has to consider the matter either as per the directions in the preliminary decree or on equitable grounds, which the court deems fit, if the decree provide so. Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition making it clear that the present writ petitioners are entitled to raise their objections regarding the allotment in evidence and if the court is convinced that they have got a strong case, then the court is at liberty to remit back the WPC NO 697/08 2 Commissioner's plan and report and get a fresh report in tune with the directions to be given by the court and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. The mistakes which are pointed out also can be considered and corrected by the court accordingly. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps WPC NO 697/08 3