IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 8TH ASWINA 1933 RP.No. 558 of 2011() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WA.321/2007 Dated 08/07/2011 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER/REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ P.M.JACOB, S/O. SRI. P.I.MARCOSE, PERUMACHERIL VEEDU, CHINGAVANAM, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. CAPT. J.G.JOSEPH, TC 27/807, RAMAKRISHNA REDDIAR ROAD, (NEAR NEW THEATRE), THAMPANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033. ADV. SRI.B.RAGUNATHAN FOR R1 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, C.J. & P.R.Ramachandra Menon, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P. No. 558 of 2011 IN W.A. No. 321 OF 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 30th day of September, 2011 O R D E R Ramachandra Menon, J. The verdict passed by the learned Single Judge on the basis of the available materials on record, particularly when no counter affidavit was filed even after 5 year from the date of filing the Writ Petition, was confirmed by dismissing the appeal preferred by the 3rd respondent in the Writ Petition (tenant) as pe the judgment dated 8.7.2011 in the Appeal. This Review Petition has been filed seeking to have the said verdict dated 8.7.2011 passed by this Court in W.A.No. 321 of 2007 reconsidered setting out various grounds. 2. The 'fair rent' fixed by the Rent Control Court @ Rs.6,966/- per month, with effect from 5.1.1991 became final on dismissal of the S.LP preferred by the appellant/review petitioner (tenant) before the Apex Court. In response to I.A.No.445 of 2011 filed by the Review Petitioner for stay, the first RP.558/11 IN WA.321/07 -:2:- respondent/landlord filed an affidavit dated 8.8.2011 showing the total arrears as on date as Rs.14,68,602/-. The review petitioner filed a reply affidavit dated 18.8.2011 stating tha the amount stated as due in E.P.No.516/2000 was Rs.22,60,598/-, while the present claim was of Rs.14,68,602/-. It was asserted and undertaken in para 6 of the said affidavit as follows: “However, I am ready and willing to pay rent at the new rates and the landlord may be directed to accept the same.” 3. Taking note of the specific averments, the matter was adjourned by two week by this Court on 23.8.2011, granting the time as sought for by the learned counsel for the review petitioner, to effect the payment/deposit. 4. Today, the learned counsel for the review petitioner concedes that no payment as aforesaid could be effected in view of the frustrating pecuniary circumstances. 5. We do not find any reason; much less any legally acceptable ground to invoke the power of review. There is 'no error apparent on the face of the record'. The idea and understanding of the review petitioner as to the scope of review RP.558/11 IN WA.321/07 -:3:- is quite wrong and unfounded. More so, in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in the decision reported in Smt.Meera Phanja v. Smt. Nirmala Kumari Choudhury (AIR 1995 SC 455) holding that it shall never be a substitute for an appeal. No interference is called for in the Review Petition. The Review Petition is dismissed. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice. P.R.Ramachandra Menon, Judge. vgs