IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
RP.No. 638 of 2010()
1. SURESH BABU, S/O.POKKALI PADMANABHAN,
... Petitioner
2. SWAMYNATHAN, S/O.POKKALI PADMANABHAN,
3. SUDHARATNAM,D/O.POKKALI PADMANABHAN,
4. SREEDEVI, D/O.POKKALI PADMANABHAN,
5. SANTHA, D/O.POKKALI PADMANABHAN,
Vs
1. VENUGOPALAN KIDAVU, S/O.LAKSHMI AMMA,
... Respondent
2. THILOTHAMA, D/O.KUNHIKANARAN,
3. VENUGOPALAN, H/O.THILOTHAMA,
4. MEYANAMETHAL MOOTHARAN, S/O.THANIYAN,
5. ELATHU METHAL KANDTHY D/O.PARAYAMPARA,
6. RAMACHANDRAN KIDAVU,
7. GANGADHARAN KIDAVU,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.M.FIROZ
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
Dated :09/07/2010
O R D E R
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.
-------------------------------
R.P.NO.638 OF 2010
IN
W.P.(C).NO.21601 OF 2008
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 9th day of July, 2010
O R D E R
The review petition is filed by the respondents 8 to 12 in
the above writ petition, which had been disposed by judgment
dated 8th July, 2009. An order passed by the court below
dismissing an application moved by the 7th defendant seeking
amendment of his written statement with respect to the extent of
a property, was the subject matter of the challenge in the writ
petition. After hearing both sides and noticing that the
amendment sought for over the pleading if not allowed would
cause miscarriage of justice, reversing the order of the court
below, and allowing the amendment sought for, the writ petition
was disposed. Some of the observations made in the judgment of
this Court would cause prejudice to respondents 8 to 12, who
were substituted as additional plaintiffs on the demise of the
plaintiff, is the ground canvassed for review.
R.P.NO.638/10 2
I heard the counsel on both sides. Request made for
reviewing the order is challenged by the counsel appearing for
the respondents contending that no binding observation had
been made. Though I do find force in the objections, it is made
clear that none of the observations made by this Court in the
judgment will have any bearing on the disposal of the suit on
merits. The court below shall dispose the suit in accordance
with law untrammelled by any of the observations made by this
Court in its judgment. Subject to what is stated above, the
review petition is dismissed.
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
JUDGE
prp
R.P.NO.638/10 3