IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 20007 of 2003(F)
1. KANHIRAKADAVATH MUHAMMED S/O. SAIDALI
... Petitioner
2. KANHIRAKADAVATH MARIKKAR S/O. SAIDALI
3. KANHIRAKADAVATH HYDERALI S/O. SAIDALI
Vs
1. KANHIRAKADAVATH KUNHEEMA UMMA
... Respondent
2. ABOOBACKER S/O. PALAKURUSSI CHEMBIL
For Petitioner :SRI.A.P.CHANDRASEKHARAN
For Respondent :SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON
The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH
Dated :02/04/2007
O R D E R
KURIAN JOSEPH, J.
----------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) Nos.20007 & 20077 of 2003
----------------------------------------------
Dated 2nd April, 2007.
J U D G M E N T
Orders passed by the Subordinate Judge’s Court,
Manjeri in O.S.93/98 and O.S.315/95 respectively are under
challenge in these writ petitions. The grievance of the petitioners
is that the Advocate Commissioner did not get sufficient time to
identify the property and submit the report, and hence the suits
should not have been tried without the report of the Advocate
Commissioner. The learned Sub Judge took the view that it was
the look out of the plaintiff in case the property is not properly
identified and that was not a cause of worry for the petitioners.
After having heard the counsel for the petitioners, I am of the
view that it is only in the interests of justice that the request of
the Advocate Commissioner for the assistance of the Taluk
Surveyor is granted, so that the property could be properly
identified. Hence the writ petitions are disposed of setting aside
the orders under challenge with a further direction to the Sub
Court to direct the Advocate Commissioner to submit the report
after the identification of the property with the assistance of the
OP Nos.20007&20077/03 2
Taluk Surveyor, within two months. Only thereafter, the suits
shall be proceeded with.
KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE.
tgs
KURIAN JOSEPH, J
———————————————-
O.P.Nos.20007 & 20077 of 2003
———————————————-
J U D G M E N T
Dated 2nd April, 2007.