IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 10TH MARCH 2008 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 7258 of 2008(L) ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA.201/2007 IN OS.179/2004 of MUNSIFF COURT, MAVELIKKARA .................... PETITIONER: ------------ REGHU, PUNNASSERILTHARAYIL, KARAZHMA PADINJATTUM MURI, CHENNITHLA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.R.KRISHNA RAJ RESPONDENTS: ------------- K.C.GEORGE, PUNNASSERIL, KARAZHMA PADINJATTUM MURI, CHENNITHLA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS SRI.PAUL JACOB (P) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC7258/2008 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.NO.27893/2007 EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.201/2007 /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.7258 of 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT This writ petition is preferred with a prayer to set aside the order dated 30.10.2007 in I.A.No.201/07 in O.S.No.179/04 by issuance of appropriate direction. 2. After hearing the learned counsel for the respondent, I feel this is a case where there has been abuses of the process of court which shall not be entertained at any cost. By my previous order in writ petition No.27893/07, I directed the court below to consider the application for setting aside the Commissioner’s plan and report before further proceedings in the matter. But by mistake, I have shown the number as I.A.No.2258/06 instead of I.A.No.201/07. The court below has passed an order in I.A.No.201/07 and the court remitted the Commissioner’s plan and report for noting such particulars. The learned counsel for the respondent brought to my notice that one of the other defendant filed I.A.No.88 of 2008 with a prayer to set aside the Commissioner’s plan and report and the court below dismissed WPC 7258/2008 2 the application. So in other words after remitting the commissioner’s plan and report as per I.A.No.201/07, the Commissioner inspected the property and submitted a plan and report which was challenged again by one of the parties as I.A.No.88/08 and that has been dismissed. Now, it is at this stage, the present writ petitioner comes here to challenge the order passed by the court in I.A.No.201/07. I feel this shall not be entertained and therefore, I dismiss the writ petition and the court below is directed to proceed with the trial. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE csl