IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2009 / 3RD MAGHA 1930 RP.No. 85 of 2009() ------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WA.2002/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/ APPELLANT ------------------------------- MUHAMMED ISMAIL, S/O.SIKHANDER RAWTHER, M.G.P.11/99,KARIMUTTY KARA, MARAYOOR VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER,SANDAL WOOD DIVISION, MARAYOOR, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. FOREST RANGE OFFICER,MARAYOOR FOREST RANGE,MARAYOOR, DEVIKULAM TALUK,IDUKKI DISTRICT. 3. STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY,SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY P.P.SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P.NO.85 OF 2009 in W.A.No.2002 OF 2008-A - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2009 O R D E R Basheer, J: Petitioner seeks review of the judgment in W.A.No.2002/2008 contending inter alia that Ext.R2(a) to (c) will clearly show that the forest department does not have any right over the trees allegedly cut from the property in question. Learned counsel further tried to impress on us that the finding entered by the Division Bench may be contrary to what has been indicated in those documents. 2. We are afraid that the attempt of the appellant is only to re-argue the matter, which cannot be permitted in a review jurisdiction. There is no merit in the review petition. It is accordingly dismissed. 3. However, we make it clear that it will be open to the 2 R.P.NO.85/2009 petitioner to approach the appropriate forum or authority to establish his right over the sale proceeds of timber, if so advised. (A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE) (THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE) cl