IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH JANUARY 2010 / 16TH POUSHA 1931 RP.No. 1399 of 2008(Y) ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.5244/2004 Dated 11/08/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/ PETITIONERS: ----------------------------------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CUSTOMS HOUSE, COCHIN-9. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CUSTOMS HOUSE, COCHIN-9. BY SRI.JOHN VARGHESE,SC,CEN.BOARD OF EXCISE RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: -------------------------------------------- 1. M/S.ALUMINUM INDUSTRIES LTD NO.1, CERAMIC ROAD, KUNDARA, KOLLAM. 2. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF MANAGER, KUNDARA BRANCH, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN FOR R2 SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH FOR R2 SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR FOR R2 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.P.1399/2008 in W.P.(C).5244/2004-Y = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 6th day of January, 2010. O R D E R The short issue raised for decision in this review petition is as to whether there is any error apparent on the face of the judgment sought to be reviewed. The review petitioners are the writ petitioners, namely, the Commissioner of Customs and the Deputy Commissioner of Customs. They challenged the decision communicated through Ext.P6. It was held in the judgment sought to be reviewed that having regard to the proceedings under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, proceedings for recovery can be only in terms of the regulations made through that statute. It was accordingly that the judgment sought to be reviewed was issued. May be that the questions raised by the petitioners could be agitated by them before any appellate RP1399/08 -: 2 :- forum but the grounds raised do not provide any room for review of the judgment. There is no error apparent on the face of the record of the judgment. Under such circumstances, this review petition fails. The same is accordingly dismissed. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/0601