IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 14TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 23RD BHADRA 1932 CRP.NO. 454 OF 2007() ----------------------------------- OS.62/2005 OF ADDL.SUB COURT, KOCHI REVN. PETITIONER(S): 2ND DEFENDANT ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. KANDAKAVU PADASEKHARAM, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY SHRI.P.M.ALFRED BENNO, AGED 35, S/O.LATE P.J.MICHAL, PADINJARE VEETTIL HOUSE, KANDAKADAVU P.O., KUMBALANGHI VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK. 2. TREASURER, GODFREY GEORGE, S/O.GEORGE, AGED 70, S/O.GEORGE, NEDUMPARAMBIL HOUSE, KUMBALANGHI P.O., KOCHI TALUK. 3. COMMITTEE MEMBER DAVID JOHN, S/O.GERVASIS, AGED 58, KADAVIL HOUSE, AROOR P.O., WARD II, AROOR. 4. COMMITTEE MEMBER, KRISHNAN THANKAPPAN, S/O.KRISHNAN, AGED 54, THEKKECHIRA, EZHUPUNNA NORTH, CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY RESPONDENT(S): (1ST PLAINTIFF 7 1ST DEFENDANT) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. JOHN CHRISTOPHER, KURISHINGAL HOUSE, ANDIKKADAVU MURI, KANADADAVU, KOCHI-7. 2. PETER, AZEEKKAL VEEDU, KANNAMALI, KOCHI-7. ADV. SRI.K.C.CHARLES FOR CAVETOR SRI.K.C.CHARLES FOR R1 SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R2 SRI.S.SUJIN FOR R2 SMT.NITA.N.S. FOR R2 THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== C.R.P. No.454 of 2007 ==================================== Dated this the 14th day of September, 2010 O R D E R Heard both sides. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner states that since the decree against defendant No.1 stands on a finding rendered against petitioner also proper remedy of petitioner is to file appeal against the judgment and decree of the trial court. Learned counsel placed reliance on the decision in Pawan Kumar Gupta v. Rochiram Nagdeo (AIR 1999 SC 1823) in support of his contention. Learned counsel seeks permission to withdraw the revision without prejudice to the right of petitioner to file appeal. In the circumstances stated by learned counsel permission is granted. Resultantly, this Revision Petition is dismissed as withdrawn without prejudice to the right of petitioner to challenge the impugned finding in appeal as law provides. No costs. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv