IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 1ST OCTOBER 2009 / 9TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 27475 of 2009(O) -------------------------- OS.234/2008 of PRL.MUNSIFF, KASARAGOD .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. VASANTHA S. ALVA, KRISHNA KRIPA, NIKARJE VILLAGE, KASARGODE. 2. SUBBANNA ALVA, KRISHNA KRIPA, NIKARJE VILLAGE, KASARGODE. BY ADV. SRI.K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER SRI.K.S.SAJEEV KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. MOHANA SHETTY, AJJIKOLANJI HOUSE, NIKARJE VILLAGE, KASARGODE. 2. BHASKARA MANIYANI, S/O. APPAYYA MANIYANI, SHIVAJI NAGAR, NIKARJE VILLAGE, KASARGODE. 3. RAMA NAIKA, S/O. AITHAPPA NAIKA, MALITHUGURI, NIKARJE VILLAGE, KASARGODE. 4. GANGADHARA NAIKA, S/O. AITHAPPA NAIKA, MALITHUGURI, NIKARJE VILLAGE, KASARGODE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.27475 OF 2009 (O) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed seeking mainly the following reliefs: i. to call for the records of the case leading to the order dated 10.9.2009 in I.A.No.1515/2009 in O.S.No.234/2008 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Kasargode as contained in Ext.P2 and quash/set aside the same by issuing an appropriate writ or order. ii. to pass an appropriate writ or order granting the plaintiffs the reliefs prayed for in I.A.No.1515/2009 in O.S.No.234/2008 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Kasargode. 2. Petitioners are the plaintiffs in O.S.No.234 of 2008 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Kasargode. Suit is one for perpetual prohibitory injunction, and the respondents are the defendants. At the instance of the petitioners/plaintiffs, an WPC.27475/09 2 Advocate Commissioner conducted local inspection of the plaint property and measured and identified that property with the assistance of a surveyor. Plaintiffs filed objections to that report seeking its remission to the same Commissioner and collecting of a fresh report. The learned Munsiff, negatived the objections vide Ext.P2 order. Propriety and correctness of that order is challenged in the writ petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 3. I heard the counsel for the petitioners. Having regard to the submissions made and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented with reference to Ext.P2 order challenged in the writ petition, I find no notice to the respondents is necessary, and, hence, it is dispensed with. It is seen, the learned Munsiff has dismissed the application moved by the petitioners raising objections and seeking remission of the report by a one line order “I.A dismissed, no costs”. Evidently, the learned Munsiff has not applied his mind to the objections raised by the petitioners/plaintiffs to WPC.27475/09 3 the report and plan. Ext.P2 is a nonspeaking order, and for that reason itself, it is liable to be set aside. Setting aside Ext.P2 order, I direct the learned Munsiff to consider Ext.P2 application filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs afresh and dispose in accordance with law. I make it clear that it is open to the court below to consider Ext.P2 application at the trial extending an opportunity to the petitioners/plaintiffs to substantiate their objections by examining the commissioner and also the surveyor. If the objections are found sustainable, naturally, the court has to pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 application. An enquiry on the merit of the commission report before the case is posted for trial, needless to point out, most often, will result in prolongation and continuation of the proceedings. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is closed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp