IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 27TH MARCH 2009 / 6TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 9880 of 2009(O) --------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17/11/2008 IN IA.3482/07 IN IA.2441/04 IN OS.333/1996 of PRL.M.C., IRINJALAKUDA .................... PETITIONER : ---------------- APPUKUTTAN, S/O. THEKKOTTU GOVINDAN, KURUVILASSERY DESOM AND VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.K.G.BALASUBRAMANIAN RESPONDENT : ----------------- SREEDHARAN, S/O. THEKKOOTTU GOVINDAN, KURUVILASSERY DESOM AND VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.9880 OF 2009 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT O.S.No.333/1996 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Irinjalakkuda was filed by the respondent for partition. Preliminary decree was passed. In the final decree proceedings, a commissioner was appointed. The commissioner filed interim report dated 11.10.2007 stating that decree schedule properties and the properties belonging to the plaintiff, his sisters and the second respondent are lying continuously without any boundaries and therefore, it is necessary to measure and fix the boundaries of those properties as well for the purpose of correctly identifying and locating the decree schedule property. In tune with the interim report submitted by the Commissioner, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.3482/2007 for issuing necessary direction to the Commissioner. Permitting the Commissioner to measure the properties belonging to the plaintiff, his sisters and the second defendant, the court below allowed the application as per Ext.P4 order dated 17.11.2008. The objections raised by the W.P.(C) No.9880 of 2009 2 writ petitioner/second defendant were overruled stating that he can raise objections to the Commissioner's report if any prejudice is caused to him on account of the measurement as directed to be made. The order passed by the court below is legal and correct. It is necessary to identify and locate the preliminary decree schedule property so as to give due share to the parties. For that purpose, if measurement of the neighbouring properties is necessary, nothing prevents the Commissioner from doing so. He sought for directions from the court for that purpose. The plaintiff filed a separate application for that purpose. The court below has allowed that prayer and issued directions. I do not find any ground to interfere with the order passed by the court below. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE pac