IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 14TH JULY 2008 / 23RD ASHADHA 1930 RP.No. 499 of 2008(A) ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.5883/2007 Dated 17/08/2007 ......................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS -------------------------------------------------------- 1. PAULOSE,S/O.CHEEKU,THANNIPILLY HOUSE WARD III, NAYARAMBALAM,ERNAKULAM 2. PHILO, W/O. PAULOSE THANNIPILLY HOUSE WARD III,NAYARAMBALAM,ERNAKULAM BY ADV. SRI.M.P.KRISHNAN NAIR RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER ----------------------------------------- THRESSIAMMA W/O. LATE DEVASYKUTTY @ SEBASTINE, MAMPILLY HOUSE NJARAKKAL P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.SABU GEORGE FOR , THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J ===================== RP No.499 OF 2008 in WP(C)5883/2007 ===================== Dated this the 14th day of July 2008 O R D E R This petition is filed to review the judgment dated 17.8.2007 in W.P. (C)No.5883/2007. This court has passed the judgment after hearing both sides and taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. Now an attempt is made to state that no such submission has been made. It is not correct. I can only reject that prayer because everything has transpired in the open court and the judgment has been dictated in the open court and I had taken into consideration the representations made and then had exonerated the judgment debtor be again sent to jail and only what is sought to be enforced by the order is the decree of the court. It is submitted that the Advocate has filed an affidavit but as stated by me earlier, I had disposed of the matter only on the representations made before court. I do not propose to entertain this review petition further. Hence it is dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Cdp/- CRPs 1918 & 1919/2003 -:2:-