High Court Kerala High Court

Kuttan ( vs Standard Investments on 20 July, 2009

Kerala High Court
Kuttan ( vs Standard Investments on 20 July, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

RP.No. 884 of 2003()


1. KUTTAN (S/O. KURIYAKKOOT VELUKUTTY),
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STANDARD INVESTMENTS, TRICHUR,
                       ...       Respondent

2. MUKUNDAN (S/O. KURIYAKKOOTT KUTTAN),

3. RADHAKRISHNAN (S/O.KUTTALA VELAYUDHAN),

4. LAKSHMI (W/O. KURIYAKKOT KUTTAN),

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.JAYAKUMAR

                For Respondent  :SRI.K.PADMANABHAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.S.GOPINATHAN

 Dated :20/07/2009

 O R D E R
             A.K.BASHEER & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ.

                     == = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                       Review Petition No.884 of 2003.
                                      in
                            R.F.A.No.94 of 2003.
                     = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

                     Dated this the 20th day of July, 2009.

                                O R D E R

Basheer, J.

This review petition is at the instance of the appellant in

RFA.No.94/2003 which was disposed of on October 3, 2003.

2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that this

Court had committed grave error in disposing of the appeal without

adverting to various contentions raised by the petitioner/appellant

especially the one relating to novation of contract. We are afraid the above

contention is wholly untenable. The appeal was disposed of after

considering the relevant materials available on record and after hearing the

learned counsel for the parties. At this distance of time, it will not be open

to the petitioner to urge before us that his contentions were not considered.

Review Petition No.884/2003.

-: 2 :-

We have perused the grounds raised by the petitioner in the memorandum of

review petition. The scope of review is admittedly very limited and narrow.

The appellant cannot be allowed to argue the appeal yet again in the guise

of a review petition.

There is no merit in any of the contentions raised in the review

petition. Therefore, it is dismissed.

A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE .

P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE.

Kvs/-