S.M.Avaran Koya vs Seethimarakkarakath Shereefa on 6 October, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 22827 of 2009(O)


1. S.M.AVARAN KOYA, AGED 75,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. A.M.USMAN KOYA, AGED 72,
3. A.M.MUHAMMAD KOYA, AGED 65,

                        Vs



1. SEETHIMARAKKARAKATH SHEREEFA, AGED 38,
                       ...       Respondent

2. KOZHIKODE CORPORATION, REPRESENTED

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.P.MOHAMMED NIAS

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH,SC,KOZHIKODE CORPN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN

 Dated :06/10/2009

 O R D E R
                     S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.
               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                       W.P.(C) No. 22827 of 2009
               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                         Dated: 6th October, 2009

                                JUDGMENT

The Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:

“To set aside Ext.P5 order and direct the court below to give

necessary directions to the Advocate Commissioner appointed in

O.S.No.669/2007 to submit his report and plan expeditiously.”

2. The grievance canvassed by the petitioners is that on default

of the Advocate Commissioner appointed by the court to determine

the points sought for, which are necessary for adjudication of the

suit, and a request being made before the court to give appropriate

directions/orders to the Commissioner to file his report, the court

passed P5 order dismissing the commission application. Counsel

submitted that Advocate Commissioner deputed had already

conducted local inspection and the report need alone be filed before

the court. Since there was delay, submission was made before the

court for early filing of the report. However, for the reason that steps

were not taken to remove the Commissioner, the court below

dismissed the commission application as such. Submissions made as

above by the learned counsel for the petitioners are not disputed by

the counsel for the respondents. The order passed by the learned

W.P.C.No.22827/09 – 2 –

Munsiff is patently unsustainable. Setting aside P5 order, I direct the

court below to take necessary steps for submission of the

commission report, issuing appropriate orders to the commissioner

to file the report at an early date. Subject to the above direction, the

Writ Petition is disposed.

srd                            S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE