IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 5TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 14TH BHADRA 1933 RP.No. 641 of 2011() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN MACA.729/2006 Dated 07/07/2011 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT ------------------------------- THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, METRO PALACE, KOCHI-18. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS 1 & 3 -------------------------------- 1. SABU @ THOMAS CHACKO, S/O.CHACKO, ALUMTHARA HOUSE, AMINCHERI KARA, NEDUMUDY.P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 688 508. 2. SHEMI, S/O. YOUSEFF KUNJU, MARAVARAYATH HOUSE, MULLIKKARA KARA, THEVALAKKARA VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK-690518. (THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN THE APPEAL WAS DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AS PER ORDER DATED 20.10.2010 IN IA.NO.2625 OF 2010) THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/09/2011, ALONG WITH RP NO. 642 OF 2011 RP NO. 643 OF 2011 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- R.P. Nos.641, 642 & 643 of 2011 in M.A.C.A. Nos.729, 727 & 725 of 2006 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of September, 2011 ORDER Basant,J. The three M.A.C.As. were disposed of by a common judgment dated 7/7/2011. The learned counsel for the common petitioner/appellant now prays that the said common judgment by which all the three M.A.C.As. were disposed of may be reviewed and the matter may be posted for detailed further hearing. The learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant submits that there was an omission to bring to the notice of this Court that the Tribunal had directed that an adverse inference be drawn against the owner/insurer. That fact unfortunately was omitted to be brought to the notice of this Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant submits that the Tribunal had also omitted to make any reference to the said circumstance in the impugned common award. In these circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant prays that an opportunity may be given to the petitioner/ R.P. Nos.641, 642 & 643 of 2011 -: 2 :- appellant to advance detailed arguments. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/ appellant. Though notice has been given to the respondents, there is no representation for them. 3. Having taken all relevant circumstances into account, we are persuaded to agree that these review petitions deserve to be allowed. We do promptly note that on the date when the common judgment was rendered, after the judgment was signed, the learned counsel had brought it to our notice that there has been an omission to bring this crucial fact to the notice of this Court. 4. In the result (a) These review petitions are allowed. (b) The common judgment dated 7/7/2011 is recalled. (c) The three M.A.C.As., now shall stand listed for hearing and disposal to 19/9/2011. (d) Call for the lower court records. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- N.K. BALAKRISHNAN (Judge) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge R.P. Nos.641, 642 & 643 of 2011 -: 3 :-