IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2009 / 17TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 11788 of 2009(O) -------------------------- OS.93/2008 of I ADDL.MUNSIFF COURT,NEYYATTINKARA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. MARY MATHA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY(REG.NO.T.284/97), REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN WILSON, S/O.LAZER NADAR,AVIKUZHI PUTHEN VEEDU,OLATHANNI, KADAVATTARAM DESOM,NEYYATTINKARA TALUK. 2. SHAJI @ JOSE, S/O.WILSON,DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.R.GOPAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DHARMAJAN,S/O.CHRISTUDAS,CRIST ILLAM, KEEZH KOLLAM,CHENKAL VILLAGE,NEYYATTINKARA TALUK. 2. PUSHPAM,D/O.PERINBHANAYAGAM,N.M.C.94, KUMARI NESALAR(DON),WARD 27,NAGAR COIL, NOW RESIDING AT CHRIST ILLAM, KEZHKOLLAM,CHEMKAL VILLAGE. 3. R.MURUKAN, S/O.LATE RETNASWAMY,RAJCOT, THYCAUD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. PREMA MURUKAN,DO. DO. 5. SABARI RATHAN, S/O.MURUKAN,DO. DO. 6. KRISHNA GEORGE,D/O. MURUKAN, DO. DO. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.11788 of 2009 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of April, 2009 JUDGMENT Defendant Nos.1 and 2 in O.S.No.93 of 2008, on the file of the court of the First Additional Munsiff of Neyyattinkara, challenge the order dated 18th February 2009 in I.A.No.334 of 2009 by which the court below appointed a Commissioner to ascertain market value of the plaint schedule property. The defendants had raised a contention that the suit is not properly valued and if properly valued, the Munsiff’s Court will have no jurisdiction. Therefore, the plaintiffs filed the application to assess the value of the properties and to appoint a Commissioner for that purpose. The court below by the order impugned allowed the application and directed the Commissioner to assess the market value of the plaint schedule property. It cannot be said that the order passed by the court below is without jurisdiction or illegal. There is no scope for interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The Writ Petition lacks merits and it is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl