IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 14TH AUGUST 2009 / 23RD SRAVANA 1931 RP.No. 715 of 2009(T) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.31242/2008 DATED 12/06/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS IN WPC ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. DR. A.K.MUTHAPPAN, PADIPPURATHEKKETHIL ANANDAMANGALAM, KARAKKADU MURI, MULAKKUZHA VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK. 2. P.N.KUSUMAM, W/O. DR. A.K.MUTHAPPAN, --- DO -- ---- DO --- PETITIONERS 1 & 2 ARE REP.BY THEIR POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, ADV.C.PUSHPANGADAN, AGED 68 YEARS, S/O. KUNJU PILLAI, PADIPPURATHEKKETHIL VEEDU, KARAKKAD, MULAKKUZHA VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR. BY ADV. MR.N.ASHOK KUMAR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN WPC ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. PROF. G.K.SASIDHARAN, S/O. GOPALAN, NALINAM, ASRAMAM, KOLLAM EAST VILLAGE, KOLLAM. 2. AJITH, S/O. SASIDHARAN OF -DO- 3. GAYATHRI, HOUSE NO.14, PUNNUKKANNOOR ROAD, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. KRISHNA KUMAR, AGED 17 YEARS, MINOR, -DO- -DO-, REPRESENTED BY MOTHER AND GUARDIAN SHYLAJA, HOUSE NO.14, PUNNUKKANNUR ROAD, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/08/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------- R.P. No. 715 OF 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of August 2009 ------------------------------------- O R D E R The review petition is filed by the petitioner in writ petition No. 31242 of 2008 which was disposed by this court by judgment dated 12/06/2009. Plaintiff in a suit moved an application for amendment of the plaint which was disallowed by the trial court. Propriety and correctness of that order was impeached in the writ petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. That writ petition after hearing both sides was dismissed finding that no interference with the order of the trial court was called for. Now the review petition is filed canvassing a case that subsequent to the disposal R.P. No. 715 OF 2009 Page numbers of the petition a decision is rendered by the apex court as to when trial of a case would begin. In the decision of the apex court it is stated that trial will commence only on recording of evidence and so much so, the judgment rendered in the writ petition affirming the order of the trial court dismissing the amendment application of the petitioner / plaintiff requires to be reviewed. 2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. I am not persuaded to accept the submission made by the counsel. A subsequent decision rendered by the apex court or by a larger bench of this court is not a sufficient ground for reviewing an earlier order passed by this court is well settled. Further more no party has a substantive right to invoke Article 227 of the Constitution of India for the exercise of supervisory jurisdiction vested with this court to R.P. No. 715 OF 2009 Page numbers correct or examine the propriety of any order passed by a subordinate court. On the materials placed before this court with reference to the order passed by the trial court, it was found that no interference by exercise of visitorial jurisdiction vested with this court was called for in the case. The review petition is devoid of any merit and it is dismissed. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE vdv