The Original petition is filed by the petitioner by challenging the order passed by the Munsiff’s Court, Thalassery in I.A.No.9/2024 in O.S.No.96/2012.

2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.

3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was defendant No. 5 in the suit in O.S.No. 96/2012, wherein the respondent, who was the plaintiff, filed a suit for perpetual injunction. The defendants Nos. 1 to 4 are the mother and siblings of the petitioner/5th defendant, who got impleaded himself as a supplemental defendant, claiming the right over the suit schedule property. A commissioner was appointed by the court on the request of the plaintiff, and the commissioner submitted the report before the court and the petitioner found the report is not correct and it is not giving the proper figure and measurement and lie of the property. Therefore, an objection was filed for evicting the commissioners before the court and a new commissioner was appointed for a fresh assessment, which came to be dismissed, and hence the petitioner before this Court.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that the petitio