IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2009 / 16TH ASHADHA 1931 RP.No. 639 of 2009 -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WA NO.1187/09 DATED 10/06/09 .......... REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT: ------------------------------------ ERAYALEATH VEETIL DAMODARAN, S/O. LATE M.P.CHERIYA RAMAN, AGED 60 YEARS, EDANAD.P.O., KANNUR DIST. BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, TRIVANDRUM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, N.H.SUB DIVISION, KANNAUR. 4. ASSISTANT COLLECTOR, THALASSERY. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S.R. Bannurmath, C.J. & Kurian Joseph, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P.No. 639 OF 2009 IN W.A. No. 1187 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this, the 7th day of July, 2009 O R D E R S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. Seeking clarification/correction of the 'authority' prescribed by us in paragraph 2 of the judgment dated 10.06.09, the present review petition is filed. It is stated that though the Court expressed to give liberty to the appellant to approach Civil Court, by inadvertent words 'civil authority' has been typed instead of 'civil court'. It is also submitted that though there were other grounds for approaching the Civil Court apart from identity of the property, that fact has not been mentioned in the judgment. After looking into the judgment it appears to us that there is an inadvertent mistake and hence this review petition is allowed. 2. The second sentence in paragraph 2 of the judgment, “If the petitioner/appellant is aggrieved by the identity of the property, it is open for him to approach the RP:639/09 IN WA No.1187/09 -:2:- civil authority in this regard, if it is permissible.” is directed to be deleted and it is replaced by the sentence, “If the petitioner/appellant is aggrieved by the identity of the property or any other available grounds, it is open for him to approach the civil court in this regard, if it is permissible.” The Registry is directed to carry out necessary corrections and issue fresh copy. In view of allowing the review petition, the order of status quo to be maintained for four weeks is extended by another four weeks. S.R. Bannurmath, Chief Justice. Kurian Joseph, Judge. ttb/vku RP:639/09 IN WA No.1187/09 -:3:-