IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 9TH DECEMBER 2008 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 RP.No. 1154 of 2008() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN RSA.695/2007 Dated 29/07/2008 AS.118/2001 of D.C & SESSIONS COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS: APPELLANTS -------------------------------- 1. VASANTHA, D/O.BHAVANI AMMA, AGED 60 YEARS SANTHI NIVAS, KONATHUKULANGARA, VATTIYOORKKAVU P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CHANDRIKA D/O.BHAVANI AMMA, AGED 52 YEARS W/O. P.P.NARAYANAN, NO.100, RAJAJI ROAD, THIRUVALLUYAR, MOONGAMPAKKAM, MADRAS-34. BY ADV. SRI.P.S.RAMESH KUMAR RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. SARADAMMA, D/O.BHAGEERATHI AMMA AGED 78 YEARS, FROM C/O.P.P.PILLAI,13-G.S.T.ROAD CHENGELPETT, MADRAS,NOW RESIDING AT 222/3 IIND STREET, THULASI NAGAR,NEAR PILLAYAR TEMPLE (VIA) MANAPAKKAM,KANNIAMMAN TEMPLE ROAD,OMPALLOUR BUS STOP,CHENKALPET,MADRAS,PHONE NO.04114226097. PIN CODE 603002 2. KUNJI,W/O.PADMANABHAN NAIR AGED 84 YEARS, ELAYIVILA MELE PUTHEN VEEDU NORTH OF KARIMKULAM ELA,ANCHAMADA PAKUTHY, VATTIYOORKAVU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. OMANA AMMA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS FROM ELAYIVILA MELE PUTHEN VEEDU NORTH OF KARIMKULAM ELA,ANCHAMADA PAKUTHY, VATTIYOORKAVU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.NOW RESIDING AT 15/375, ELLUVILA VEEDU PUTHEN VEEDU,THEJAS NAGAR VAYALIKKADA,KODUNGALLOOR PO,TVM-695 013. 4. SOMAN NAIR, RETIRED GOVERNMENT SERVANT ELAYIVILA MELE PUTHEN VEEDU NORTH OF KARIMKULAM ELA,ANCHAMADA PAKUTHY, VATTIYOORKAVU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. BHANUMATHI AMMA,AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS ELAYIVILA MELE PUTHEN VEEDU NORTH OF KARIMKULAM ELA,ANCHAMADA PAKUTHY, VATTIYOORKAVU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. AMMU, W/O.KOCHI CHERUKKAN,AGED 79 YEARS ELAYIVILA MELE PUTHEN VEEDU NORTH OF KARIMKULAM ELA,ANCHAMADA PAKUTHY, VATTIYOORKAVU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. GOPINATHAN NAIR,AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS RESIDING AT ELAYIVILA MELE PUTHEN VEEDU NORTH OF KARIMKULAM ELA,ANCHAMADA PAKUTHY, VATTIYOORKAVU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 8. SAILAJA, AGED ABOUT 45 W/O.APPUKUTTAN PILLAI FROM ELAYIVILA MELE PUTHEN VEEDU,NORTH OF KARIMKULAM ELA,ANCHAMADA PAKUTHY, VATTIYOORKAVU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. NOW RESIDING AT NILAMEL KONTHAUVEEDU,KARIMANKULAM VATTIYOORKAVU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 9. SAROJINI, D/O.APPUKUTTAN PILLAI AGED 42 YEARS, ELAYIVILA MELE PUTHEN VEEDU, NORTH OF KARIMKULAM ELA,ANCHAMADA PAKUTHY, VATTIYOORKAVU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 10. THANKAMONY, W/O.MONIYAN FROM ELAYIVILA MELE PUTHEN VEEDU, NORTH OF KARIMKULAM ELA,ANCHAMADA PAKUTHY, VATTIYOORKAVU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. NOW RESIDING AT T.C.58/1270,(1) THERAKAM JUNCTION, MANACAUD P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 11. HARIKUTTAN NAIR, S/O.APPUKUTTAN PILLAI AGED 37 YEARS, FROM ELAYIVILA MELE PUTHEN VEEDU, NORTH OF KARIMKULAM ELA,ANCHAMADA PAKUTHY, VATTIYOORKAVU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.NOW RESIDING AT T.C. 4/1920,PALLIVILA VEEDU,PARAMBIL KONAM, KOWDIAR , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 003. 12. RAMANI, D/O.APPUKUTTAN PILLAI (WRONGLY SHOWN AS RAMAN IN A.S.JUDGEMENT) FROM ELAYIVILA MELE PUTHEN VEEDU, NORTH OF KARIMKULAM ELA,ANCHAMADA PAKUTHY, NOW RESIDING AT CHANDRAVILASOM, VELIYAM, KATTUKKAL P.O., PARASSALA. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.P. BALACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- R.P.NO: 1154 OF 2008 IN R.S.A. No. 695 OF 2007 ------------------------------- Dated this the 9th December, 2008. O R D E R By a considered order passed on 29.7.2008 this Court dismissed C.M.Application No: 470/2007 which is an application for condonation of delay of 1118 days in filing R.S.A.695/2007 as direction to take steps for notice being issued to the first respondent had not been complied with and consequently the R.S.A also was dismissed. This review petition is filed on 26.9.2008 for review of the said order and judgment with a delay of 16 days and C.M.Application 799/2008 is filed to condone the said delay of 16 days in filing the review petition. There is absolutely no merit in the review sought for considering the circumstances under which C.M.Application 470/2007 was dismissed by this Court. Filing review application after two months to review the said order and the consequent dismissal of R.S.A is only to protract the disposal of the case and there is no merit either in review petition 1154/2008 or in C.M.Application 799/2008. R.P.1154/08 in R.S.A 695/2007 2 In the result I dismiss both C.M.P.Application 799/2008 and R.P.1154/2008. K.P.BALACHANDRAN JUDGE jj