IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2010 / 28TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 9359 of 2010(O) --------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19/02/2010 IN IA.855/2010 IN OS.368/2007 of I ADDL. MUNSIFF COURT,NEYYATTINKARA .................... PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. N.KRISHNAN, S/O. NEELAKANTAN, 'VRINDAVAN', CHALACHAVILA, NEAR HOSPITAL JUNCTION, PARASSALA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. N.SIVAN PILLAI, S/O. NEELAKANTAN, M.V.V.COTTAGE, THOTTATHUVILA, MARIYATHOTTAM, PARASSALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. MANOJ KUMAR, S/O. SIVAN PILLAI, M.V.V. COTTAGE, THOTTATHUVILA, MARIYATHOTTAM, PARASSALA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. (REP.BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER THE IST PETITIONER) BY ADV. SMT.M.HEMALATHA RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. RAVEENDRAN, S/O. NEELAKANTAN, MANIKANTAN'S HOUSE, THOTTATHUVILA MARIYATHOTTAM, PARASSALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. VALSALA, W/O. MANIKANTAN, AMMA BUILDING NEAR HANUMAN TEMPLE, MARUTHOOR, NEYYATTINKARA NOW RESIDING AT PUTHEN VEEDU, MARUTHOOR, -DO-DO- 3. SUKUMARI, W/O. RAVEENDRAN, MANIKANTAN'S HOUSE, THOTTATHUVILA, MARIYATHOTTAM, PARASSALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.BHAVADASAN, J. ------------------------------------- WP(C) No.9359 of 2010-O ------------------------------------- Dated 19th March 2010 Judgment The petitioners assail Ext.P10 order, by which the application filed by them to remove the case from the list of trial was dismissed by the Additional Munsiff's Court, Neyyattinkara. 2. The petitioners instituted a suit as OS No.368/07 before the Additional Munsiff's Court, Neyyattinkara. They claim to be in possession of various extents of land under various Survey numbers of Parassala Village. The suit was one for declaration, easement by necessity, putting up of boundaries, recovery of possession, eviction, injunction and other consequential reliefs. 3. It is not necessary to go further into the details, for the purpose of disposing of this Petition. It is claimed that there was no boundary, separating Plaint A, B WPC 9359/10 2 and C schedule properties form D schedule property. The complaint is that taking advantage of the said fact, the defendants are trying to trespass into Plaint A, B, C and F schedule properties. It seems that the petitioners filed an application to issue a Commission to measure the property on the basis of the respective documents. The said application was allowed and the Commissioner has filed a report and plan, which is produced as Ext.P5. After the filing of the Commissioner's report, the case was posted for objections to 29.01.10. On the said date, the petitioners filed their objections to the Commissioner's report and plan. But, the petitioner submits, the Court below, without considering the objections filed by theim, included the case in the list of trial to 09.04.2010. The complaint of the petitioners is that the Court below ought to have considered their objections and taken a decision on the same before listing the case for trial. According to the petitioners, the Commissioner's report and plan are not in accordance with the documents produced for inspection. WPC 9359/10 3 4. The Court below has considered the relevant aspects and has listed the case for trial. If the petitioners have any grievance against the Commissioner's report and plan, they may urge their contentions in that regard at the time of trial and there is no reason to believe that if such a contingency arises, the petitioners will not be given an opportunity take out another commission for the purpose of obtaining a proper plan. Reserving the right of the petitioners in this regard, this Writ Petition is disposed of. P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sta WPC 9359/10 4