IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 28TH AUGUST 2008 / 6TH BHADRA 1930 RP.No. 917 of 2008(R) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.6664/2008 Dated 28/02/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER. ----------------- J. SATHYANESAN, S/O. LATE JOSEPH, AGED 79, RESIDING AT SATYA VILASAM BUNGALOW, POOVACHAL, PERUMKULAM VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM MATHEW (VETTOOR) RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS. ------------- 1. KERALA STATE HANDLOOM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., REGISTERED OFFICE, 32/249, THILLERIE ROAD, KANNUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, KERALA STATE HANDLOOM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, NEMOM.P.O, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI. E.K. NANDAKUMAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= R.P.No. 917 of 2008 in W. P (C) No. 6664 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 28th August, 2008. O R D E R The petitioner seeks review of my judgment in the writ petition which reads thus: “The petitioner is admittedly liable to pay an amount of Rs. 25,724.73 to the 1st respondent. But he submits that the debt is time barred in spite of which the respondents are not returning the title deeds deposited as security with the first respondent. I am of opinion that in so far as the action of the respondents is not in respect of any public function, the remedy of the petitioner lies in filing a suit especially since disputed question of fact as to whether the recovery of the amount is barred by limitation is involved. Therefore, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to file a suit, this writ petition is dismissed.” I do not find any grounds to review the said judgment. Accordingly, the review petition is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.