IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 31ST MAY 2011 / 10TH JYAISHTA 1933 RP.No. 316 of 1998(H) --------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN OP.9941/1989 Dated 07/04/1993 .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------- M/S.INDU OIL MILLS, KOTTUKULAM ROAD, COCHIN - 2. REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, JAMNU DHANKANI. BY ADVS. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR SRI.R.MURALEEDHARAN RESPONDENT(S):RESPONDENTS & PETITIONERS 2 TO 7 IN O.P. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT) SALES TAX OFFICE, SPECIAL CIRCLE, MATTANCHERRY,KOCHI-2. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT), SALES TAX OFFICE, SPECIAL CIRCLE, TRICHUR. 3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT) SALES TAX OFFICE, SPECIAL CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM. 4. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT) SALES TAX OFFICE, SPECIAL CIRCLE, ALLEPPEY. 5. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRFETARY TO GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. M/S.KMP OIL INDUSTRIES LIMITED, PALLURUTHY, COCHIN-6, REPRESENTED BY SHRI.SANDEEP MUSSADI, MANAGING DIRECTOR. svs .........2/-.... ...2... R.P. NO.316/1998 7. M/S.KPL OIL MILLS LTD., CRANGANORE ROAD, INRINJALAKUDA, REPRESENTED BY SHRI.K.L.ANTO, MANAGING DIRECTOR. 8. M/S.ST.MARY'S OIL MILLS, DEVELOPMENT AREA AROOR, REPRESENTED BY P.V.ALEXANDER, MANAGING DIRECTOR. 9. M/S.EDAVELITHARA RICE & OIL MILLS, PADINJAREKARA, VAIKOM, REPRESENTED BY SHRI.GEORGE KURIAKOSE, MANAGING PARTNER. 10. M/S.ARAVIND OIL MILLS, MATTATHUKADAVU, SHERTHALLEY , REPRESENTED BY SHRI.J.AMANTHA PRABHU, MANAGING PARTNER. 11. M/S.ARAVIND OIL INDUSTRIES, MUTTATHUKADAVU, SHERTHALLEY , REPRESENTED BY SHRI.RADHAKRISHNA PRABHU, MANAGING PARTNER. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- RP.316/1998 in OP.NO.9941 of 1989 --------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of May, 2011 JUDGMENT It is noticed that the judgment which is sought to be reviewed was passed as early as on 7.4.1993. The issue pertains to assessment completed with respect to the year 1987-88 to 1989-90. In all probability the matter might have become infructuous by this time. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that he has no instructions from the party to pursue the matter. Under the above mentioned circumstance, the review petition is dismissed. C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/ WP(C) 2