IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2008 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1930 RP.No. 153 of 2008(B) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.28782/2007 Dated 29/10/2007 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER:PETITIONER: ----------------------------------------------------- G.BHAGAVAT SINGH, AISWARYA, NEDUNGOLAM P.O., NOW RESIDING AT "SAROJ GANGA", NEDUNGOLAM P.O., KOLLAM. BY SRI.G.BHAGAVAT SINGH(PARTY IN PERSON) RESPONDENT: RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------------------- DAMAYANTHI SUSEELA, SANJAY BHAVAN, NEDUNGOLAM, PARAVUR VILLAGE, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI. C. UNNIKRISHNAN THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- R.P. No. 153 of 2008 IN W.P(C) No. 28782 of 2007 --------------------- Dated this the 3rdday of June, 2008 ORDER This Review Petition is filed against the order passed by me in WPC Nos.19820 and 21099/07. There were two points considered in that case whereby I have allowed an amendment and thereafter regarding the issuance of a Commission I directed the court below to pass appropriate orders in an application filed for setting aside the Commissioner’s plan and report. It appears that on the basis of these observations of me, the court below suo motu passed an order in an application for setting aside Commissioner’s plan and report and appointed Adv. Saju as the new Commissioner to visit the property. As there was some difficulty to proceed with the work, Adv. J.Suresh was appointed as the new Commissioner. At the time of passing of the judgment by me, I was made to understand that there is an application for setting aside the Commissioner’s plan and report which in fact was not pending before the court. One of the parties has filed such an application. But it has been dismissed and only a review application was filed without a delay condonation RP NO.153/08 2 application. Since this court directed the trial court to consider the matter of setting aside the Commissioner’s report and plan, the said court suo motu took up the matter and passed an order and appointed the Commission thereby the order of review application for setting aside the Commissioner’s plan and report is now on file. It has to be stated that I happened to pass an order only under the impression that at the time of passing of my order an application for setting side Commissioner’s plan and report were pending before the trial court. But now it is seen that it was not so and therefore the order passed by me on that mistaken fact has to be reviewed and I do so. 2. The next question arises is what must be the further process. The property was originally inspected by Adv.Saju and the court also initially appointed him to carry out the other work which the party wanted by virtue of their respective applications. Therefore I feel that now an order can be passed whereby the very same Adv.Saju can be directed to inspect the property with the assistance of the Surveyor as ordered by the court below in IA Nos.1206/05 and 1166/07 and note the particulars. When Such a Commissioner’s plan and report is filed, parties are permitted to file their objections RP NO.153/08 3 and in case they feel that it is to be set aside they can file applications. I also reserve the right to the person who have filed the earlier applications to set aside Commissioner’s plan and report to raise all those grounds in that application and it can be considered by the court below and appropriate orders thereon shall be passed after permitting both sides to file their objections and in case of necessity to let in evidence and dispose of the matter in accordance with law. This revised order is passed accordingly by reviewing the order dated 29th October, 2007. The review petition is disposed of as above. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps