P.B. REGHUNATHAN NAIR Vs. DEVAKIAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the parties are common and matter in issue involved in both the Original Petitions is same, these Original Petitions are heard together and disposed of accordingly.

(2.) Both the Original Petitions are filed by the Judgment Debtor, in Execution Petition No.65 of 2014 in Original Suit No.198 of 2003, on the files of the Munsiff's Court, Changanacherry, challenging Exts.P3 and P8 orders passed by the Execution Court, in execution of the decree passed in the above Original Suit.

(3.) The petitioner contended that the decree is not executable and plaint schedule item No.4 pathway cannot be identified, without the assistance of the Surveyor. It is also contended that Ext.P8 goes beyond the decree. In the light of the contentions raised in the Execution Petition, the respondent filed Execution Application No.28 of 2015, to appoint an Advocate Commissioner, to execute the decree under her supervision in tune with the decree. After considering the rival pleas, the Execution Court passed Ext.P3 order, directing the Amin to reinstate the decree schedule item No.4 pathway with the aid and supervision of the Advocate Commissioner appointed in Execution Application No.28 of 2015, in tune with the decree. The Advocate Commissioner was also appointed accordingly.