IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 10TH JULY 2008 / 19TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 787 of 2008(R) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF : ---------------------------------- VELAYUDHAN, S/O.KODUVALLIYIL THAMI, THAYYOOR VILLAGE, DESOM, TALAPPILLY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.SAJITH KUMAR K. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS : -------------------------------------------- 1. RAJAN, S/O.EDATT PARAMBIL PARAMESWARAN, THAYYOOR VILLAGE, DESOM, TALAPPILLY TALUK. 2. VISWAMBARAN @ SIVASANKARAN, S/O.EDATT PARAMBIL KUTTAN, THAYYOOR VILLAGE, DESOM, TALAPPILLY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.D.SREEKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 787 of 2008(R) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS 341/07 DATED 09.07.2001 EXT.P2:- TRUE COPY OF THE COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND PLAN DATED 16.07.2004 EXT.P3:- TRUE COPY OF THE IA 1424/04 DATED 30.09.2004 FILED TO SET ASIDE COMMISSIONER'S REPORT EXT.P4:- TRUE COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF SURVEYOR EXT.P5:- TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN IA 1424/04 IN OS 341/01 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, WADAKANCHERRY -TRUE COPY- P.A. TO JUDGE pac M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ........................................... WP(C).No.787 OF 2008 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 10th DAY OF JULY, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.341 of 2001 on the file of Munsiff Court, Wadakkancherry. This petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, challenging Ext.P5 order. Ext.P5 order was passed in I.A.1424 of 2004, an application filed by the petitioner to set aside the report and plan submitted by the Commissioner. Under Ext.P5 order, learned Munsiff dismissed the application but clarifying that if after recording the evidence, it is found that demarcation or identification of the property by the Commissioner is not correct, question of setting aside the report and plan can be considered at that stage and at this stage, report and plan cannot be set aside. 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner argued that there is mistake in the report and plan submitted by the Commissioner as in the written statement, it was admitted that there is a way on the west of the plaint schedule property and that was not shown by the Commissioner in the report. 3. On hearing the learned counsel, I do not find any illegality or irregularity warranting interference in exercise of WP(C) 787/2008 2 the powers of this court under Article 227 of Constitution of India, when the order itself shows that after evidence, if the court finds that there is any mistake in demarcation or identification, question of setting aside the report and plan can be considered. In such circumstances, petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE lgk/-