OP(C) NO. 356 OF 2025 1 2025:KER:27758 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1947 OP(C) NO. 356 OF 2025 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 16.12.2024 IN CS NO.13 OF 2024 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT/SUB COURT/COMMERCIAL COURT,NEYYATTINKARA PETITIONER: VASANTHA KUMARI. P AGED 54 YEARS D/O. PANCHALI, RESIDING AT V. V. BHAVAN, PORAKKAL VILA, KARUMANOOR, PARASSALA P. O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 695502 BY ADVS. P.T.MOHANKUMAR RAM MOHAN RESPONDENT: RESUL RAJ AGED 54 YEARS S/O. PONNU PILLAI, GREEN HILL HOUSE, PANNIMALA, VELLARADA, VELLARADA DESOM, VELLALRADA VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695505 BY ADVS. ARUN V.G. V.JAYA RAGI(K/3390/1999) R.HARIKRISHNAN (KAMBISSERIL)(K/993/2012) NEERAJ NARAYAN(K/332/2016) OP(C) NO. 356 OF 2025 2 2025:KER:27758 THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP(C) NO. 356 OF 2025 3 2025:KER:27758 JUDGMENT (Dated this the 1st day of April, 2025) The petitioner filed this original petition challenging Ext.P3, an order in I.A.2 of 2024, whereby a person from the panel produced by the plaintiff is appointed as an expert to assist the commissioner and to file a report. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has an objection that he has also furnished a panel, but the person was selected from the panel produced by the respondent alone. The petitioner has now produced the name of one retired Deputy Chief Engineer from the Public Works Department along with a memo and prays that along with the commissioner as well as the expert appointed by the Court from the panel submitted by the respondent, the petitioner’s nominated person shall also be appointed. So that, both the engineers can inspect the property along with the commissioner and file a report. 3. The learned counsel for the respondent opposes the prayer and submitted that when one person is selected by the Trial Court and appointed as an expert, there is no necessity for the Court to appoint any other person. OP(C) NO. 356 OF 2025 4 2025:KER:27758 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondent, and taking note of the fact that since the dispute is regarding the realisation of the amount of Rs.56 lakhs that is regarding the construction made by the respondent /plaintiff, I deem it appropriate that it is better to avoid controversy, experts from both sides, one from the plaintiff and the other from the defendant, also assist the commissioner, and a joint report is to be filed before the Court. 5. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the original petition directing the trial court to appoint Sri.B vincent, retired Deputy Chief Engineer, Kerala Public Works Department, as an expert and direct him to assist the already appointed expert as per Ext.P3, along with the commissioner to visit the property and file a report. The Original Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE saap OP(C) NO. 356 OF 2025 5 2025:KER:27758 APPENDIX OF OP(C) 356/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P-1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN C S NO.13/2024, DATED 07-12-2024 Exhibit P-2 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OSNO.1216/2024 , FILED BY THE PETITIONER AS PLAINTIFF BEFORE THE MUNSIFF OF NEYYATTINKARA, DATED 12-12- 2024 Exhibit P-3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL COURT IN IA NO.2/2024 IN CS NO.13/2024, DATED 16-12-2024 Exhibit P-4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMISSION APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN OS 13/2024, FOR APPOINTMENT OF AN ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER, DATED17-12-2024 Exhibit P-5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL COURT IN IA 4/2024 IN C S 13/2024, DATED 20-12-2024 //True copy//PA to Judge