IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2008 / 2ND MAGHA 1929 RP.No. 34 of 2008() ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN Mat.A.333/2007 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT/PETITIONER: --------------------------------------------------- A. PUSHPA, DAUGHTER OF RARICHUTTY, KONNATH HOUSE, KULATHINKUNNU AMSOM AND DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.MOHAMMED ASLAM RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------- CHANDRAN, SON OF KUNHIKELU, AGED 68 YEARS, AKKARAPARAMBATH HOUSE, MAKKADA AMSOM, BADIROOR DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV.SHRI P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/01/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN- UL-RASHID,JJ. -------------------------------------------------------- R.P.No.34 OF 2008 IN MAT.APPEAL NO.333 OF 2007 -------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2008 O R D E R KURIAN JOSEPH, J. It is fairly clear from the judgment that there is an error apparent on the face of the record whereby an important clause regarding the terms of compromise has been omitted to be noted in the judgment. The clause reads as follows: “(5) It is made clear that the respondent/husband hereby relinquishes his right for maintenance against his children, which he had already made in the separate maintenance proceedings, i.e., M.C.393/03 before the Family Court, Kozhikode, confirmed by this court in R.P. (FC)No.53/05. Separate memo will be filed in that case.” The review is hence allowed and the judgment and decree in the Mat.Appeal is recalled. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. HARUN- UL-RASHID,JUDGE. dsn