IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 13TH MARCH 2009 / 22ND PHALGUNA 1930 RP.No.252 of 2009 © IN S.A. No.373 OF 1997 -------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN S.A. NO.373/97 DT.16/07/97 -------------- REVIEW PETITIONER: ------------------------- VENGALIL AMBUJAKSHI AMMA, AGED 69 YEARS, D/O ACHUTHA MENON, PANNIYANKARA AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADV. SMT.BINDU GEORGE RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------ 1. PILAPRA NARAYANIKUTTY AMMA, D/O PILAPRA MADHAVIKUTTY AMMA, -DO- -DO- 2. PILAPRA SANKUNNIKUTTY MENON, S/O PILAPRA MADHAVIKUTTY AMMA, -DO- -DO- 3. PILAPRA SAVITHRI AMMA, D/O PILAPRA MADHAVIKUTTY AMMA, -DO- -DO- 4. PILAPRA ACHUTHANKUTTY MENON, S/O PILAPRA MADHAVIKUTTY AMMA, -DO- -DO- 5. PILAPRA JAYAKUMAR, S/O SANKUNNIKUTTY MENON, -DO- -DO- RP.No.252 of 2009 -2- 6. P.R.NADHAN, PERUMBILAVIL HOUSE, MANKAVU IN VALAYANAD AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.P.BALACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------------------------ C. M. Application No.191 of 2009 & R. P. No.252 of 2009 in S.A. No.373 of 1997 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of March, 2009 ORDER Review Petition No.252/09 is filed to review the judgment passed in S.A.373/97 dismissing the Second Appeal at the admission stage concurring with the concurrent verdicts of the courts below and C.M. Application No.191/09 is filed to condone the delay of 4240 days in filing the above review petition. The delay condonation application is supported by a Medical Certificate issued by one Dr.K.K.Ramakrishnan of Arya Vaidya Pharmacy (Coimbatore) certifying that from 10/07/97 to 15/01/09 the appellant was under his treatment and she had been advised to take complete bed rest. The age of the patient stated in the said certificate which is produced as Annexure-A is 76 years whereas the age of the R. P. No.252 of 2009 -2- petitioner is 69 years as shown in the review petition and in the affidavit filed along with C.M. Application 191/09. In any event, this Court dismissed the Second Appeal at the admission stage after hearing the counsel and being satisfied that the decree passed concurrently by the courts below is correct; that there is no question of law to be considered in Second Appeal and that the appeal deserved only to be dismissed. The said judgment cannot be reviewed. Hence, I dismiss both the review petition and the C.M. Application. K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE kns/-