IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN THURSDAY, THE 22ND NOVEMBER 2007 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA 1929 RP.No. 832 of 2007() -------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRP.2740/1999 DATED 18/07/2007 .................... PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS: ------------------------------------------ K.P.BALAN, S/O.PONNAN, KUMBLAKOTTIL, ELAVANCHERRY VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAGHAT DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.) SRI.K.RAMESH RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. THE TALUK LAND BOARD, CHITTUR. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, CHITTUR. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. V.K.T. MOHANAN. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/11/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN, J. = = = = = = = = R.P. NO. 832/2007 IN C.R.P. 2740/1999 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2007. O R D E R Raman, J. This is a petition seeking review of the judgment in C.R.P. 2740/1999. This Court dismissed the civil revision petition for the reasons stated therein. Since there is a concluded judgment between the parties, it was found that it cannot be re-opened. The review has been filed on the premise that out of 13.26 acres which was outstanding in tenancy with Paru, only 5.24 acres were excluded from the account of the petitioner's brother K.P. Velayudhan and according to the petitioner, the entire balance extent were liable to be excluded from his account as against which only 1/3rd is allowed by the Taluk Land Board. In spite of the fact that repeated opportunities were given, no materials were placed to substantiate this contention. As such there is no error apparent on the face of record. The review is liable to be dismissed. 2. However, learned counsel submits that there is some arithmetical mistake in calculating the extent while the order impugned was passed by the Taluk Land Board. If so, nothing prevents him from moving the Taluk R.P. 832/2007 :2: Land Board. The learned counsel seeks an observation reserving his right to do so. Needless to state that if the petitioner has any such right, this order will not take away such right. P.R. RAMAN, (JUDGE) knc/-