Vijayalekshmi vs Ramachandran Nair
2021 Latest Caselaw 636 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

    THURSDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 17TH POUSHA, 1942

                       OP(C).No.1450 OF 2020

   AGAINST THE ORDER IN OS 424/2010 OF MUNSIFF COURT, PUNALUR


PETITIONER:

              VIJAYALEKSHMI, AGED 50 YEARS
              W/O. LATE THULASEEDHARAN, THADUVILAPUTHENVEEDU,
              AERAM, ANCHAL, PIN 691 306

              BY ADVS.
              SMT.SREEDEVI KYLASANATH
              SRI.ACHUTH KYLAS
              SRI.DEAGO JOHN K
              SHRI.AMAL DEV C.V.

RESPONDENT:

              RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
              SREENILAYAM, AERAM, ANCHAL, PIN 691 306

              BY ADV. SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD

     THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.01.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 OP(C).No.1450 OF 2020

                                       2




                          Sathish Ninan, J.
                 ==============================
                     O.P.(C) No.1450 of 2020
                   ==========================
            Dated this the 07th day of January, 2021

                                JUDGMENT

The request of the petitioner - defendant to

remit the Commissioner's report and plan was

rejected by the trial court, challenging which this

original petition is filed.

2. The relief in this suit as well as counter

claim raised by the defendant, is for fixation of

boundary. Alleging that there are various errors in

the Commissioner's report and plan presently

submitted by the Commissioner, the petitioner -

defendant sought for remission of the same. The

trial court, as per the order impugned, has

dismissed the application.

Noticeably, evidence was not taken on the

application. The suit is of the year 2010, it would

be sufficient if the petitioner - defendant is given OP(C).No.1450 OF 2020

opportunity to adduce evidence in support of his

contentions as against the Commission report and

plan at the time of trial and the same is considered

by the court. If during the trial, the court finds

that the report and plan needs to be remitted, then,

it shall be open for the court to do so

notwithstanding the order dated 28.05.2020 in I.A

No.1 of 2020.

Sd/-

Sathish Ninan, Judge

vdv OP(C).No.1450 OF 2020

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE WILL NO. 2/96 DATED 30-12-1995

EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AMENDED PLAINT IN O.S NO. 424/2010 DATED 04-12-2010 FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE MUNSIFF COURT, PUNALUR

EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT DATED 31-05-2012 IN O.S NO. 424/2010 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MUNSIFF COURT, PUNALUR

EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AMENDED COUNTER CLAIM DATED 03-07-2014 IN O.S NO. 424/2010 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MUNSIFF COURT, PUNALUR

EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT SUBMITTED BY ADV. GEORGE MALIEKAL AND N. GOPINATHA PILLAI DATED 03-01-2017

EXHIBIT P5(a) TRUE COPY OF THE MAHAZAR DATED 02-08-

2016 ALONG WITH THE PLANS.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE COURT IN O.P(C) 356/2019 DATED 01-02-

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A 1/2020 DATED 06-

01-2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, PUNALUR DATED 28-05-2020 IN I.A NO. 1/2020 IN O.S NO. 424/2020