IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD JULY 2008 / 12TH ASHADHA 1930 RP.No. 673 of 2008(G) ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.7000/2008 Dated 28/02/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/1ST RESPONDENT : ----------------------------------------------------------- P.O.VARGHESE, VAYALARIKATHUPUTHENPURAYIL VEEDU, KALANJOOR, PATHANAPURAM , KOLLAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.LIJU.V.STEPHEN RESPONDENTS/2ND RESPONDENT & PETITIONER : ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. K.N.SUDARSANAN KARUMALIL VEEDU, PUNNATHALACHERRY, KOLLAM. 2. K.AJITH, S/O. KUTTAPPAN PROPRIETOR, K.N.K.TAILORS, KOLLAM. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN CAME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------ R.P.No. 673 of 2008 in W.P(C) No.7000/2008 ------------------------------ Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2008 ORDER This Review Petition is preferred to review the judgment dated 28/02/2008. It was a Writ Petition filed by the claimant. This court only held that there was a previous order in which, the court held that “the appellant is therefore free to withdraw the amount on condition that the appellant returns entire movables attached as per the schedule to the petition.” It was submitted that only 16 out of 26 sewing machines were returned and therefore, there is no non-compliance of the order of the court. This court gave an opportunity for production of the movables and further directed, when there is a substantial compliance of the order, the permission can be granted to withdraw the amount. I do not find any error apparent on the face of the record which requires the inference. If there is any other legal remedy provided the disposal of this matter will not stand in the way. The Review petition is dismissed as accordingly. M. N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE scm