High Court Kerala High Court

Abdul Latheef Haji vs Shereefa on 10 August, 2007

Kerala High Court
Abdul Latheef Haji vs Shereefa on 10 August, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 24047 of 2007(K)



1. ABDUL LATHEEF HAJI
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. SHEREEFA
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.S.RAJESH

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

 Dated :10/08/2007

 O R D E R
                     M.N.KRISHNAN, J.
               -----------------------------
                 WP(C)No. 24047 OF 2007 K
               -----------------------------
             Dated this the 10th August, 2007.

                         JUDGMENT

This writ petition is preferred to set aside the order

passed by the Munsiff, Kodungallur in I.A.921/06 in

O.S.403/04. It is an application filed for setting aside

the commissioner’s plan and report. The Taluk Surveyor,

the Advocate Commissioner and the plaintiff were examined

as P.Ws 1 to 3. So, as far as the evidence of P.W.3, the

plaintiff is concerned the court has observed that he has

not gone through Exts.C1 and C1(a) report and plan. So

less about his evidence the better. In the application

also what the party has chosen is to have his own choice of

a surveyor, a private surveyor who is an Advocate also and

he submits a plan and report and wants to set aside the

plan and report prepared by the commissioner who is

appointed by the court. Nothing has been brought out as is

seen from the order of the learned Munsiff to totally

reject the commissioner’s plan and report. Just because a

private surveyor has visited the property and had given a

plan to the party, it will not be a ground to set aside

another plan and report submitted by an Advocate

Commissioner with the assistance of a surveyor. Therefore,

I do not find any merit in the writ petition and it is

WPC 24047/07 2

dismissed. But I make it clear that the dismissal of this

shall not be a bar to the present writ petitioner in

adducing evidence against the commissioner’s plan and

report at the stage of evidence.

M.N.KRISHNAN
Judge
jj