IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH MARCH 2008 / 22ND PHALGUNA 1929 RP.No. 261 of 2008() -------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRP.1105/2005 .................... PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/PETITIONER/DEFENDANT ----------------------------------------------------------- GOPAKUMARAN, S/O.LATE KUMARAMENON, P.K.HOUSE, KALLANMARATHODIYIL, ELAMBLASSERY, POMBRA P.O., OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN RESPONDENTS: DEFENDANTS ----------------------- ACHUTHANKUTTY MENON @ K.P.A.MANI, PALAKKAL VETTAKULAM VIA KARAKURUSSERRY, POMBRA P.O., PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.T.C.MOHANDAS SRI.T.M.SUNIL THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P.No. 261 OF 2008 IN C.R.P.No.1105 OF 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 13th day of March, 2008 ORDER Heard Sri.Binoy Vasudevan, counsel for the review petitioner and Smt.Chitra Sunil, counsel for the respondent, who according to the petitioner is dead and gone even at the time when the order was passed by me in the civil revision petition. As rightly pointed out by Smt.Chitra Sunil, the Review Petition itself is defective in as much as even on the showing of the petitioner, the respondent is dead and gone. But at the same time, I cannot ignore the submission that since my order has been issued in favour of a dead person, the same is to be construed as nonest one. I therefore allow the Review Petition and recall the order dated 18/07/2007. The legal representatives of the deceased petitioner will do the needful for getting themselves impleaded as additional petitioners in the civil revision petition. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv.