IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2009 / 3RD ASHADHA 1931 RP.No. 508 of 2009 ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.6560/2009 Dated 03/04/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONERS: ---------------------------------- 1. DASAN, S/O. PADMANABHAN, POOCHAKKAL HOUSE, KALOOR KARA, MUMMARAMANGALAM VILLAGE,THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. K.G. AJIMON, S/O. GOPALAN, KANDATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, KARIMKUNNAM KARA, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 3. T.A. RAJU, S/O. AYYAPPAN, THEKKEL HOUSE, NEDIYASALA, PURAPPUZHA, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 4. THANKACHAN THOMAS, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O. THOMAS, MUTTAKUNNEL HOUSE, THATTARATHATTA, KARIMKUNNAM, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DIST. BY ADV. SRI. C.C. THOMAS, SENIOR ADVOCATE, & ADVS. SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN SRI.NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY, TAXES (A) DEPARTMENT , GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, EXCISE COMMISSIONERATE, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY EXCISE COMMISSIONER (IDUKKI), OFFICE AT THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DIST. 4. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BENNY GERVASIS. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2009 ALONGWITH R.P. NO.509/09 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: “C.R.” K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------ R.P.Nos. No. 508/09, 505/09, 507/09, 509/09, 559/09, 561/09 and 563/09 ------------------------------------ Dated, this the 24th day of June, 2009 Order Balakrishnan Nair, J. These review petitions are filed praying to correct an apparent mistake in the last but one sentence in paragraph 26 of the common judgment under review. The said judgment is reported in Komalan v. State of Kerala, 2009 (2) KLT 744. 2. We heard learned Senior Counsel Sri.C.C.Thomas and also Senior Government Pleader, Sri.Benny Gervasis. Going by the declaration made by us in paragraph 17 of the judgment, the penultimate sentence in paragraph 26 should be corrected as follows: “It is also declared that in the case of Sago palm (Choondapana) toddy, if the strength of alcohol detected is not above 8.1%, the offence under Section 56(b) of the Act will not lie”. It is ordered accordingly. The review petitions are allowed as above. R.P.No.508/09 etc. - 2 - 3. We notice that in the 40 remaining cases disposed of by the common judgment (viz. W.A.No.2867/07 and W.P.(c) Nos.36951/07, 37437/07, 37439/07, 37865/07, 1046/08, 2770/08, 2878/08,2923/08, 2945/08, 2945/08, 2968/08, 5778/08, 5790/08, 5826/08, 5879/08, 5883/08, 8865/08, 9776/08, 13104/08, 33221/08, 34126/08, 34534/08, 34601/08, 35941/08, 36862/08, 1513/09, 1516/09, 3028/09, 6479/09, 6559/09, 6748/09, 6837/09, 7078/09, 7128/09, 7129/09, 7697/09, 8702/09, 8902/09 and 9254/09), no review petitions are filed. We feel that they should be reviewed suo motu. Therefore, it is ordered that the order in the above review petitions will govern these cases also and the common judgment in them are also corrected accordingly. Sd/- K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. Sd/- M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE. DK. (True copy)