IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD NOVEMBER 2011 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA 1933 OP(C).No. 3802 of 2011(O) -------------------------------- OS.1228/2010 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER --------------- VIKRAMAN, S/O.SUKUMARAN, NEDIYARVILAKOM VEEDU, PACHALLOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.BASANT BALAJI SRI.R.GOPAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. R.CHANDRAN KUTTY, PARAMBIL, T.C.42/10(10), VALLAKKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 008. 2. SHAKEELA, W/O.R.CHANDRAN KUTTY,PARAMBIL, T.C.42/10(10), VALLAKKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 008. 3. USHA KUMARI @ USHA SREEDHAR, W/O.SREEDHARAN NAIR, VAISAKHAM, KURIYATHI, MANACAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 009. 4. CECIL LOCKE, T.C.41/78, NEAR MANACAUD MARKET, MANACAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 009. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs O.P.(C). NO. 3802/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14.10.2011 IN I.A.5665/2011 IN O.S.NO.1228/2010 OF THE 2ND ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. P2: COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED 16.7.2005 IN O.S.1467/2003 OF THE 2ND ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ----------------------------------- O.P.(C)No.3802 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Plaintiff in O.S.No.1228 of 2010 of the Court of the Second Additional Sub Judge, Thiruvananthapuram is aggrieved by Ext.P1, order refusing to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to report on possession of the attached property. 2. Petitioner filed the suit for recovery of money from the fourth respondent. The suit was filed on 2010 and certain properties were placed under conditional attachment as per order on I.A.No.6060 of 2010. Respondents 1 to 3 claimed title and possession of the attached properties as per document Nos.656 of 2010 and 657 of 2010 dated 15.02.2010 and requested trial court to lift the attachment. While so, petitioner filed application for appointment of a Commission to report on possession of the said property. Learned Sub Judge observed that commissioner cannot be appointed to report on possession of the property and disallowed the prayer. O.P.(C)No.3802 of 2011 2 3. It is contended by learned counsel that Ext.P2, judgment will show that one Mohan Antony obtained a decree for permanent prohibitory injunction against the fourth respondent dated 16.07.2005. 4. Assuming so, the transaction claimed by respondents 1 to 3 in their favour is on 15.02.2010. Learned Sub Judge observed that if petitioner has a contention that respondents 1 to 3 are not in possession of the property, he can produce appropriate evidence in that regard. It is not for the Commissioner to speak on possession of the property. I do not find reason to interfere with that finding. This Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE /True copy/ P.A. to judge ln