IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2011 / 3RD ASHADHA 1933 RP.No. 256 of 2011() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN FAO.125/2009 Dated 01/02/2011 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENT -------------------------------- HASHIM,S/O.ABDUL RAHIMAN,AGED 54 YEARS, R/AT ANWAR MANZIL,KARAVARAM,PUTHUSSERY MUKKU PO, KALLAMBALAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA RESPONDENT(S): APPELLANT ------------------------ ABDUL JABBAR SALIM,MRWA NO.40, VAYAPALLI ROAD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: RP.No. 256 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES A1. COPY OF THE TREASURY CHALAN NO.389 DATED 11.08.2009 OF THE STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE A2. COPY OF THE DEMAND DRAFT ISSUED BY CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK NO.082535 DATED 26.07.2010 A3. COPY OF THE INCUMBERANCE CERTIFICATE DATED 09.11.2010 A4. COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.601 OF 2008 EXECUTED BY JUDGEMENT DEBTOR ` RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR OF ANWAR NASHAD DATED 9.2.2008 A5. COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.602 OF 2008 EXECUTED BY THE JUDGMENT DEBTOR RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR OF BEEMA MAJIDA DATED 09.02.2008 A6. COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 15.10.2010 ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT. A7. THE SALE DEED DATED 15.10.2010 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER, RESPONDENT, ANWAR NISAD AND BEEMA MAJIDA IN FAVOUR OF SIYAVUDEEN A8. COPY OF THE CHEQUE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT FOR RELEASE OF THE AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN THE EXECUTION COURT A9. COPY OF THE COUNTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE CHEQUE APPLICATION A10. COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR RELEASE OF THE AMOUNT BASED ON ANNEXURE A6 AGREEMENT // TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE KKJ THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. ----------------------------------- C.M.Appln.549 OF 2011 & R.P.No.256 OF 2011 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 24th day of June, 2011 O R D E R Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan,J. This review petition is filed by the respondent in an appeal filed against an order dismissing an application under Order XXI Rule 90 CPC. At the time of admission of that appeal, the court had issued an order of stay on condition of deposit of Rs.5 lakhs. The appeal was ultimately not pressed by the appellant. By doing so, the appellant had invited a decision on merits against him. As the appeal was not pressed, it was dismissed. As a consequence, the interlocutory orders granted in the appeal had to be vacated. Evidently, the condition imposed to sustain the interim order also stood vacated. This Court, therefore, directed that any amount in deposit before the court below on the basis of the interim order be released to the appellant. We do not find any error RP.256/11 2 apparent on the face of the record of the judgment, at any rate, entitling the respondent in that appeal to seek review of that judgment in so far as it orders release of the amount deposited by the appellant to sustain the interim order granted at the time of admission of the appeal. In our view, this review petition does not stand at all. Under such circumstances, we are not inclined to condone the delay in filing the RP. The application for condonation of delay and the review petition are accordingly dismissed. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. Sd/- P.S.GOPINATHAN, Judge. kkb.27/6.