IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2011 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1932 RP.No. 128 of 2011(O) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN OP(C) NO.1099/2010 Dated 10/12/2010 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER: PETITIONER/RESPONDENT NO.1 IN THE O.P. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ATHULYA CRICKET CLUB(REG.NO.1-103/08), NEDIYASALA, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY V.R.BIJU, VALIYAVEETTIL HOUSE, KOLANI.P.O,THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.JAMES VINCENT RESPONDENTS: PETITIONERS 1 & 2 AND RESPONDENTS 2 TO 20 IN O.P. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. IDUKKI DISTRICT CRICKET ASSOCIATION, THODUPUZHA, REP.BY ITS HON. SECRETARY, B.VINOD, MADATHIPARAMBIL, RIVER VIEW ROAD, THODUPUZHA.P.O. 2. KERALA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, T.C.MATHEW, K.C.A.COMPLEX, SASTHAMKOVIL ROAD, THYCAUD.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-14. 3. DEVDHAR CRICKET CLUB(REG.NO.1-104/08), VADAKKUMURI,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.A.VINOD, PUTHUKOLIL, MUTHALAKODAM.P.O, THODUPUZHA. 4. THE SECRETARY, IDUKKI DISTRICT SPORTS COUNCIL, THODUPUZHA. 5. RENGAKELI CRICKET CLUB,VENGALLOOR, THODUPUZHA, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY. R.RAMESH, PULLAMPARA MADAM, THODUPUZHA VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA.P.O. 6. SECRETARY, JAI HIND LIBRARY, MUTHALAKODAM P.O, THODUPUZHA. 7. MANAKADU CRICKET CLUB, MANAKADU.P.O, THODUPUZHA, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY. 8. DIGITAL CRICKET CLUB, RIVERVIEW ROAD, THODUPUZHA, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY. ......2/- RP.No.128 of 2011(O) --2-- 9. PURAPUZHA CRICKET CLUB, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, M.PADMANABHAN, KADUTHUMPADICKAL, PURAPUZHA VILLAGE, NEDIYASALA.P.O, THODUPUZHA. 10. ARIKUZHA CRICKET CLUB, ARIKUZHA. P.O, THODUPUZHA, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY. 11. KARIMANNOOR CRICKET CLUB, KARIMANNOOR P.O REP.BY ITS SECRETARY. 12. POORNIMA CRICKET CLUB, IDUKKI, BY SECRETARY P.J.JOSEPH. 13. CAMMANDOZ CRICKET CLUB, KARIKODE, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, K.P.NAJEEB, KARAKUNNUMPURATH HOUSE, KARIKODE.P.O,THODUPUZHA. 14. ACQUA CRICKET CLUB, MUNDEKALLU, MANAKADU,THODUPUZHA, REP.BY SECRETARY. 15. MUTTOM CRICKET CLUB, MUTTOM. P.O, THODUPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 16. M-SHARE (EDAVETTY C.C) CRICKET CLUB, EDAVETTY, THODUPUZHA, REP. BY SECRETARY. 17. ST.JOSEPH'S (MOOLAMATTOM.C.C) CRICKET CLUB, MOOLAMATTOM, REP.BY SECRETARY. 18. NEELIMA CRICKET CLUB, (VETTIMATTOM.C.C), VETTIMATTOM, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY. 19. VIVIDS CRICKET CLUB, KALAYANTHANI, THODUPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 20. LAKOTIA CRICKET CLUB (COMPUTER CENTRE), THODUPUZHA, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY. 21. DEFENDER CRICKET CLUB, ELLUMPURAM.P.O, MUTTOM, REP.BY SECRETARY. BY ADV. SHRI.SHAJI.P.CHALY THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: KRK THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- R.P.No.128 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 04th day of March, 2011 ORDER First respondent in O.P(C).No.1099 of 2010 seeks review of judgment dated December 10, 2010 in the said case on the ground set forth in the petition for review. In short, grievance of petitioner is that this Court disposed of the writ petition without notice to and hearing of petitioner and that under cover of the judgment of this Court contesting respondents are prolonging the matter pending before the learned District Judge. According to the learned counsel, maintainability of I.A.No.432 of 2008 filed by the first respondent (in this review petition) has to be heard and decided first. Learned counsel submitted that the said application has been filed by an unregistered body which has no locus standi to file such an application and is not maintainable. I have heard learned counsel for first respondent also. 2. Ext.P1 in O.P(C).No.1099 of 2010 was under challenge in that proceeding at the instance of the first respondent. It is true that this Court disposed of the writ petition when it came up for admission. This Court found that challenge to Ext.P1, order in the writ petition could not be entertained in R.P.No.128 of 2011 -: 2 :- view of the judgment/order passed by this Court in W.P(C). No.20851 of 2008 and R.P.No.877 of 2008 and this Court directed that I.A.No.432 of 2008 requires to be disposed of as early as possible. That observation was made in the light of the order passed by learned Judge of this Court on August 19, 2009 in R.P.No.877 of 2008 in W.P(C).No.20851 of 2008. There, it was directed that the learned District Judge has to dispose of I.A.No.432 of 2008 but it was made clear that the said direction did not affect consideration of an application preferred under Order VI Rule 17 or Order I Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure. This Court while disposing of O.P(C).No.1099 of 2010 did not go into any of the contentious issues and only directed that I.A.No.432 of 2008 has to be disposed of in the light of the judgment in W.P(C).No.20851 of 2008 and order in R.P.No.877 of 2008. I am unable to understand how the judgment in O.P(C). No.1099 of 2010 affected any right of petitioner herein to seek a review. 3. So far as the contention that maintainability of I.A.No.432 of 2008 has to be heard and decided first is concerned, neither judgment in W.P(C).No.20851 of 2008 nor the order in R.P.No.877 of 2008 states so. Hence learned District R.P.No.128 of 2011 -: 3 :- Judge has to hear I.A.No.432 of 2008 and dispose of the same. While hearing that application, its maintainability also can be considered. With the above direction this review petition is closed. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-