IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2009 / 2ND MAGHA 1930 RP.No. 64 of 2009 ----------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRP.669/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS: 1. K.T.MOHAMMED UNNI KARUPPAM VEETIL THEKKETHIL, ORUMANAYOOR P.O. 2. RASIYA, W/O. MOHAMMED UNNI KARUPPAM VEETIL THEKKETHIL, ORUMANAYOOR P.O. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF RESPONDENTS/REVISION PETITIONERS: 1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. 2. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), GENERAL THRISSUR, CHEMBUKKAVU. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.P. Balachandran, J. -------------------------- R.P.No.64 of 2009 in C.R.P.No.669 of 2008 -------------------------- ORDER The grievance of the petitioner is that in the last sentence of paragraph 4 of the order in the revision petition, this Court observed as follows: “I have worked out the calculations made in Annexure-R1 (c) statement and am satisfied that the statement is incorrect and is advancing claim for highly excessive amounts and that on a proper calculation, amounts due will be much less and that too by a few lakhs, even if the mode of calculation adopted by the respondents/decree holders is accepted.” According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, when such an observation is made, the court below will be bound by it and even if the court below finds, on calculation, that further amounts are due to the decree holders, the RP 64/09 2 execution court may not accept that, against the observation so made. It is made clear that the observation is so made on a random calculation, which is not asserted to be correct and it may be that the said observation may not be correct. The court below need consider the said observation only as a casual observation made for the purpose of disposal of the revision petition and it is for the execution court to work out the correct amount going by the decisions made mention of in the order and nothing stands in the way of the execution court in making a proper calculation as per those decisions. This review petition is disposed of with the above clarification. 22nd January, 2009 (K.P.Balachandran, Judge) tkv