IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 27TH JUNE 2008 / 6TH ASHADHA 1930 RP.No. 570 of 2008(Y) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.7765/2007 Dated 26/03/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 5 IN THE WRIT PETITION ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. M/S.RELIABLE WARES PVT.LTD, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, 39/610 B, MONASTERY ROAD, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682 011. 2. MR.K.T.BENNY, AGED 51, MANAGING DIRECTOR M/S.RELIABLE WARES PVT.LTD., 39/610 B, MONASTERY ROAD, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682 011, RESIDING AT KAIRALI APARTMENT, 7TH FLOOR, 77A, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682036. 3. MRS.ANN BENNY, AGED 49, W/O.K.T.BENNY, DIRECTOR, M/S.RELIABLE WARES (P) LTD, 39/610 B, MONASTERY ROAD, ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM COCHIN - 682011, RESIDENT AT KAIRALI APARTMENTS, 7TH FLOOR, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682 036. 4. MR.K.V.THARU, AGED 74, S/O.K.T.VARGHESE, CHAIRMAN & DIRECTOR, M/S.RALIABLE WARES (P)LTD., RESIDING AT.SHANTI APARTMENT, KOCHI-20. 5. OMANA THARU AGED 68, W/O.K.V.THARU, DIRECTOR, -DO- -DO- BY ADV. SRI.N.SUBRAMANIAM SRI.M.S.NARAYANAN SRI.P.T.GIRIJAN RESPONDENT/ PETITIONER IN WRIT PETITION --------------------------------------------------------------------- SMT.T.GNANALAKSHMI, SOLE PROPRIETORESS, M/S.MANJU AGENCIES, REPRESENTED BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER-SMT.T.MAHALAKSHMI, D/O.THIRUVENKIDOM, RESIDING AT KUMARA BHAVAN, CONVENT ROAD, KOLLAM, KOLLAM EAST VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, KERALA. BY ADV. SMT.AYSHA YOUSEFF THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J ===================== R.P. No.570 OF 2008 in WP(C)No.7765/2007 ===================== Dated this the 27th day of June 2008 O R D E R This review petition is preferred against the judgment of this Court in WP(C)No.7765 of 2007. The matter had arisen out of an order passed in I.A.No.1327 of 2006 in O.S.No.620 of 2003. The suit was one for realisation of the amount. There was an attachment. When the matter was taken up before this Court, it granted an opportunity to furnish security. The court below passed an order holding that the property having an extent of 8.9 cents which is offered as security as the value of Rs.26,25,000/- and held that it is sufficient security. It was challenged before me that the valuation shown is incorrect and the person who has furnished security does not have absolute right over the property as well as the flat, but, it is only having a fractional right. Therefore this Court considered the matter and held that over 8.90 cents it only an undivided share and therefore the court below has to apply its mind afresh after permitting both parties to supply materials and decide the question. It is that order which is sought to be reviewed. It has to be stated that there is no error apparent on the face of RP 570/2008 -:2:- the record. But there is subsequent development according to the learned counsel for the review petitioner that another property has been attached. It is a matter which the party has to bring before that court in the light of the order passed by this Court for fresh consideration regarding the furnishing of security. With these observations, I dismiss the review petition. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Cdp/-