IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 19TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 4809 of 2008(V) ------------------------------------- OS.174/2001 OF MUNSIFF-MAGISTRATE COURT,PONNANI. .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- M.E.S. COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING KUTTIPPURAM, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY/ CAMPUS MANAGER, PROF.P.O.J. LABBA P.O.THRIKKANAPURAM, VIA.TAVANUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.KRISHNANUNNI (SR.), SRI. C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. JANHAR ALI S/O.RARUMKANDATH KUNHIMOHAMMED HAJI P.O.THRIKKANAPURAM, VIA. TAVANUR MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. USMAN KOYA, S/O. -DO- -DO- 3. BAVA SHARAFUDDEEN -DO- -DO- 4. R.K. FATHIMA, D/O. -DO- -DO- BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.C. NO. 4809 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 8th day of February, 2008. J U D G M E N T Heard. This writ petition is preferred to direct the Munsiff-Magistrate, Ponani not to receive in evidence the documents marked as Exts.A6(a), A6(b), C1 and C2. The learned counsel had made me available for perusal the extract of the order passed by the learned Munsiff. The learned Munsiff has correctly passed an order whereby he held that with respect to the marking of certain Commissioner's plan and report Exts.A6(a) and A6(b) are marked subject to proof by examination of the Commissioner for the reason it is their plans and reports prepared in another suit which cannot be marked without examining the person who had prepared the same. Similarly, Exts.C1 and C2 reports are exparte Commission reports which also cannot be looked into without examining the Commissioner. So it has to be made clear that unless and until the persons who W.P.C 4809 OF 2008 -:2:- are responsible for the preparation of the documents are examined before the Court the mere putting a mark to the document cannot be taken as a ground to state that it has been received in evidence. Therefore I make it very clear that if the Court wants to rely upon these documents it has to be proved in accordance with law and if at a belated stage only it is attempted to be proved, then the Court shall necessarily has to give opportunity to the defendants in the suit to cross-examine and further if that examination is done after the closure of the defendants' evidence, in case of necessity the defendants may be permitted to recall and further examine and if necessary they may be permitted to examine other witnesses as well. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-