IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2011 / 18TH JYAISHTA 1933 RP.No. 939 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN LAA.1457/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S):/APPELLANT. -------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), NH KOZHIKODE CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, N.H.DIVISION, KOZHIKODE. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.GOPINATH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS. --------------------------------------- 1. K.VIJAYAN, S/O.RAMAN, PENSIONER, SOUPARNIKA, AMBALAPPADI, P.O.ERANHIKKAL, VIA ELATHUR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. CHANDRI.K, W/O.NARAYANAN, HOUE WIFE, AVIYIL HOUSE, POST CHEMMARATHUR, VIA VATAKARA. 3. RADHA.K,W/O.DASOOTTY KUTTOTH, KUNNUMMAL HOUSE, HOUSE WIFE, POST KOLLAM, KOYILANDY. 4. JAYALAKSHMI.K, W/O.MOHANDAS T.V, HOUSE WIFE,TEACHER VEETTIL HOUSE, NEAR SIDHASAMAJAM POST,SIDHASAMAJAM VADAKARA. 5. VANAJA.K, W/O.VIJAYAN, HOUSE WIFE, KOLANGARATH HOUSE, POST ANNISSERY, VIA TALAKULATHUR, KOZHIKODE. 6. RAJITHA.K, W/O.RAJAN, HOUSE WIFE, TOTTATHIL HOUSE, POST PUNNASSERY, NANMANDA, BALISSERI. BY ADV. SRI. B.KRISHNAN THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- RP. No. 939 of 2010 in LAA. No. 1457 of 2009 ------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of June, 2011 O R D E R Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The Government seeks review of our judgment mainly on the reason that it was without noticing the judgment in LAA. No. 646 of 2009 and connected cases that we have re- fixed the value of land under acquisition in this case at Rs.60,000/- per cent. Sri. S. Gopinath, learned Government Pleader appearing for the review petitioner Government submitted that the above judgment pertains to acquisition of land in the same locality for the same purpose and wanted us to review our judgment and re-fix the value of land at Rs.45,000/- per cent. 2. Opposing the submission of the learned Government Pleader, Mr. Krishnan who took notice as directed by us submitted that it was on the basis of Annexure-I judgment passed by the Sub Court in respect of an adjacent property RP.939/10 -2- – a judgment which has attained finality, that this Court decided to re-fix the value of land involved in this appeal at Rs.60,000/- per cent. The Government was put to notice regarding the above judgment which was produced as Annexure – I in I.A. No. 2852/10. 3. We have considered the rival submissions addressed at the Bar. The question is whether there is any warrant for invocation of the narrow jurisdiction of this Court for reviewing its own orders and judgments, the contours of which are well delineated by Rule 1 of Order 47 C.P.C. According to us, the above question can be answered in this case only in the negative. The Government cannot contend that they were taken by surprise due to the production of Annexure – I judgment by the respondents appellants. Annexure-I judgment was produced along with I.A.2852/10 and it is after hearing the Government that we allowed the above IA and received Annexure – I as an item of evidence RP.939/10 -3- on the side of the appellants. We have in fact, specifically marked the above item as Ext.A5. No ground for review is made out. Even if the Government has any genuine grievance, the remedy lies not in the form of a review petition. Petition for review is dismissed. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) (C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE) ksv/-