IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2009 / 17TH CHAITHRA 1931 RP.No. 389 of 2009() -------------------- ( AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WA.640/2009) (WP(C) 5447/2009 OF THIS COURT) .................... REVIEW PETITIONER: APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------------- ADV.RANI JOY, D/O.AUGUSTINE JOSEPH, AGED 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT 28/3227, 1ST CROSS, CHERUPARAMBATH ROAD, KADAVANTHRA, COCHIN-20. BY ADV. SRI.N.D.JOY RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: --------------------------------------- 1. DR. JESS RAPHEAL, PAVNATHARA HOUSE, B-7, 4TH FLOOR, JANAKI APARTMENT, K.K.PADMANABHAN ROAD, POWER HOUSE ROAD, ERNAKULAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. R. LAKSHMINARAYAN THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & P.S. GOPINATHAN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.P. 389 /2009 IN W.A. 640 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL, 2009. J U D G M E N T Raman, J. We find no error apparent on the face of the record for reviewing the judgment rendered in the writ appeal. The learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner contended that he has filed the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and therefore, the appeal is maintainable. He contended that his right will be affected if the judgment is not reviewed. Though we did dismiss the writ appeal at the admission stage itself, it was after considering the merits of the case. The review being not a re-hearing of the appeal and in the absence of any error apparent on the face of the record, this review petition is dismissed. P.R. RAMAN, JUDGE. P.S. GOPINATHAN, JUDGE. KNC/-