Loading...

Kuriyan vs Mariyakutty on 12 June, 2008

Kerala High Court
Kuriyan vs Mariyakutty on 12 June, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 18034 of 2007(V)


1. KURIYAN, AGED 45, S/O.GEORGE,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. VIJU, S/O.GEORGE, ALIYATTUKUDY HOUSE,
3. VALSA, W/O.GEORGE, ALIYATTUKUDY HOUSE,

                        Vs



1. MARIYAKUTTY, W/O.PATHROSE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. SHERLY, W/O.SAJU PETER, VALLIMALIL

3. NEEL, S/O.SAJU, VALLIMALY HOUSE,

4. NIMA, D/O.SAJU, VALLIMALY HOUSE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR)

                For Respondent  :SRI.THOMAS M.JACOB

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :12/06/2008

 O R D E R
                     M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.

                       -------------------------------

                        W.P.(C) No.18034 of 2007

                       -------------------------------

                      Dated this the 12th June, 2008.

                            J U D G M E N T

Petitioners are the plaintiffs in O.S.No.144/2001, on

the file of Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor. After the report submitted by

the Commissioner was remitted to the Commissioner and

Commissioner submitted a further report and plan, petitioners filed

I.A.No.1167/2001 for remitting the report once again, back to the

Commissioner, contending that Commissioner did not comply with the

earlier directions. The case of the petitioners is that even though as

per the work memo, Commissioner has to report the actual width of

the way upto plaint ‘A’ schedule property, what is reported under

Ext.P10 report and Ext.P11 plan is only that as requested by the

counsel for plaintiffs under the work memo, way has been shown in

the plan. Commissioner has not directly answered the objections

raised. Under Ext.P15 order, learned Munsiff did not consider this

crucial aspect. In such circumstances, Ext.P15 order is quashed.

Learned Munsiff is directed to remit the report back to the

Commissioner to file a further report, at the expense of the plaintiffs.

W.P.(C) No.18034/2007

2

The Commissioner shall verify each and every objection raised in

I.A.No.1167/2001 and file a report specifically answering the

objections, after verification.

The writ petition is disposed as above.

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE

nj.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information