IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE THURSDAY, THE 28TH JUNE 2007 / 7TH ASHADHA 1929 WP(C).No. 3833 of 2004(F) ------------------------- OS.39/1994 of MUNI-MAGI.COURT,MANNARKAD .................... PETITIONER: ------------ SUNDARAN @ BALAKRISHNAN, S/O. KUNJAN MOOTHAN, PADINJAREKARIPADATH, THACHANATTUKARA AMSOM DESOM, MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SYAMALA, D/O.CHUTHATHU PARALATTIL DECEASED AMMUKKUTTY AMMAL THACHANATTUKARA AMSOM AND DESOM, MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. VALSALA, D/O. -DO- -DO-. 3. VENUGOPALAN, S/O. -DO- -DO-. 4. SETHUMADHAVAN, S/O. -DO- -DO-. 5. BHARGAVI AMMAL, W/O. BALAKRISHNA GUPTHAN, CHUTHATHU PALOTTIL HOUSE THACHANATUKARA AMSOM AND DESOM, MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 6. PANKAJAM AMMA, W/O.NAMBAN KUTTY GUPTHAN, -DO- -DO-. 7. BALAKRISHNA GUPTHAN, S/O. KUNJAN MOOTHAN -DO- -DO-. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO. 3833/2004 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE PLAINT DATED 18.3.1994 EXT.P2: COPY OF THE COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND PLAN DATED 25.3.1994 EXT.P3: COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF THE AMENDMENT PETITION DATED 17.6.1994 EXT.P4: COPY OF THE COMMISSIONER'S PLAN AND REPORT DATED 19.6.2000 EXT.P5: COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION FOR AMMENDMENT OF PLAINT DATED 29.8.2001 EXT.P6: COPY OF THE WRRITTEN STATEMENT DATED 29.7.1994 EXT.P7: COPY OF THE OBJECTION IN COMMISSION REPORT AND PLAN DATED 18.6.2001 EXT.P8: COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION FOR REMIT THE COMMISSION REPROT AND PLAND ATED 9.6.2003 EXT.P9: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.10.2003 BY THE MUNSIFF MAGISTRAE COURT, MANNARKKAD IN I.A. 409/03 IN O.S. 39/94 /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J. ---------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 3833 of 2004 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of June 2007 JUDGMENT Heard both sides. I do not find any warrant for setting aside Ext.P9 order passed by the learned Munsiff on the application filed by the petitioner to remit the Advocate Commission once again, under the supervisory jurisdiction of this court. 2. However, having regard to the submissions addressed at the bar, even as I confirm Ext.P9, I make it clear that it will be open to the petitioner to cross examine the commissioner during trial and if the court below is convinced, on the basis of the evidence the petitioner adduces against the commission report, that there is justification for remitting the commission report once again, the confirmation of Ext.P9 will not stand in the way of the court below doing that before final judgment is delivered. The writ petition is disposed of as above. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. Dpk