IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 28TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 6TH ASWINA 1932 RP.No. 432 of 2010(N) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.7536/2010 Dated 22/03/2010 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): 3RD RESPONDENT IN THE WRIT PETITION --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SIVALINGAPPA GOWDER, AGED 80 YEARS, S/O.ANANTHARAMA GOWDER, RESIDING AT PRESENT AT PATHAYAM, CHULLIMADA, KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1,2 &4 IN THE WPC ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. BALABHADRAN, AGED 71 YEARS, S/O.APPUKUTTAN, RESIDING AT KUNNUKADU HOUSE, THENKURUSSI VILLAGE, ALATHUR TALUK. 2. PALAKKAD MUNCIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PALAKKAD. 3. THE SECRETARY, PALAKKAD MUNCIPALITY, PALAKKAD. 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PALAKKAD MUNCIPALITY, PALAKKAD. ADV. SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R2,3 SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON FOR R2,3 SRI.JIBU P THOMAS FOR R2,3 SRI.P.S.APPU FOR R2,3 SRI.C.A.ANOOP FOR R2,3 SRI.V.V.ASOKAN THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ R.P.No.432 OF 2010 IN W.P.(C) NO. 7536 OF 2010 (N) ===================== Dated this the 28th day of September, 2010 O R D E R The basis on which the review petition was filed was that a civil dispute between the review petitioner and the writ petitioner was pending and that it was without adverting to the said fact that the judgment was rendered. 2. Now, it is submitted by both sides that the civil dispute has been decided in favour of the writ petitioner by judgment of this Court in RSA No.444/10 dated 9th of September, 2010. In that view of the matter, review petition is only to be rejected and I do so. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp