IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2009 / 8TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 1991 of 2009(K) ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA 4795/08 IN OS.144/2007 of PRL.M.C.KOZHIKODE-I .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. KRISHNANKUTTY NAIR, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O. KARTHYAYANI AMMA, RESIDING AT KANIYAMCHALIL HOUSE, KALPATHOOR AMSOM, NACHAD DESOM, MEPAYYOOR P.O., KOYILANDI TALUK. 2. BALAN NAIR, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O. KRISHNAN NAIR, POOLAKKUZHIYIL HOUSE, CHEEKKILOODE AMSOM, KULATHOOR DESOM, CHEEKKILODE P.O., KOZHIKDE TALUK. 3. MADHAVAN NAIR, AGED 66 YEARS, S/O. KUNJIRAMAN NAIR, KALATHINGAL HOUSE, KAKKOOR VILLAGE, NADUVALLOOR AMSOM, KAKKOOR P.O., KOZHIKODE TALUK. 4. KARTHIYAYANI AMMA, AGED 76 YEARS, D/O. RAMOTTY NAIR, CHATHURALAYIL HOUSE, CHEEKKILODE AMSOM, KULATHOOR DESOM, CHEEKKILODE P.O., KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADVS. MR.A.BALAGOPALAN, MR.K.SANEESH KUMAR. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- ELAMBILASSERY MEETHAL RARICHAN, S/O. ANDI, AGED 72 YEARS, ELAMBISSERY MEETHAL HOUSE, CHEEKKILODE AMSOM, DESOM, CHEEKKILODE P.O., KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/06/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.1991/2009 K APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.144/2007. P2: COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY DEFENDANTS 1 AND 3. P3: COPY OF THE SEPARATE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONERS 2 AND 4. P4: COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT FILED BY THE COMMISSIONER IN O.S.NO.144/2007 AND THE ROUGH SKETCH APPENDED TO THE COMMISSION REPORT. P5: COPY OF THE I.A.NO.4795/2008 IN O.S.NO.144/2007 TOGETHER WITH THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE PETITIONERS AND THE OBJECTION DTD. 20/12/2008. P6: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE PRL.MUNSIFF-I, KOZHIKODE IN I.A.NO.4795/08 IN O.S.NO.144/07 DTD. 2/01/2009. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R1(A): COPY OF THE INJUNCTION ORDER IN I.A.1007/07 IN O.S.144/07 OF THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, KOZHIKODE. R1(B): COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE DEPONENT IN SUPPORT OF I.A.1320/08 SO AS TO RECORD HIS OBJECTIONS TO THE COMMISSIONER'S REPORT. R1(C): COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE DEPONENT IN SUPPORT OF HIS APPLICATION IN I.A.1321/2008 BEFORE THE COURT OF MUNSIFF, KOZHIKDE. R1(D): COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS HEREIN SO AS TO PERMIT THEM TO EXAMINE THE COMMISSIONER AS A WITNESS. /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 1991 OF 2009 K ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 29th day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T The defendants in OS.No.144/07 on the file of the Principal Munsiff Court, Kozhikode are the petitioners. Suit is for injunction and the respondent, the plaintiff. An Advocate Commissioner appointed by the court conducted a local inspection and filed a report and plan over which the petitioners /defendants raised some objections. Petitioners also moved an application for setting aside that report and plan. Ext.P5 is the copy of that application. Learned Munsiff dismissed the application holding that it is highly belated as the case has already been included in the list. Ext.P6 is the copy of the order. Impeaching the propriety and correctness of Ext.P6 order, the petitioners have filed this writ petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. I heard the counsel on both sides. Having regard to the submissions made and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented with reference to the materials produced WPC.1991/09 : 2 : in the case, the learned Munsiff is directed to give an opportunity to the defendants, at the time of trial of the suit, to substantiate their objections raised to the Commissioner’s report and plan, if steps are taken for examination of the Commissioner within the time fixed by the court. Ext.P6 order will not stand in the way of the petitioners in taking appropriate steps to challenge the report and plan as indicated above. Reserving their right to challenge the report and plan in the way indicated above, the writ petition is closed. (S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE) aks