IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2010 / 28TH ASWINA 1932 RP.No. 708 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN LAA.11/2007 Dated 04/11/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT IN L.A.A. ----------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.K. BABU. RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT IN L.A.A. ----------------------------------- K.SUMATHY, VADAKKEMATTAMTHUNDIL, SUMATHY MANDIRAM, MANGAD, KOLLAM, PIN 673307. BY ADV. SRI. V.V.RAJA. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN & K.T. SANKARAN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.P. No. 708 OF 2010 IN L.A.A. No. 11 OF 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 20th day of October, 2010. O R D E R Krishnan, J. This review petition is preferred to review the order in C.M.A.15/07 in L.A.A.11/07. There was a delay of 387 days in filing the appeal. The Court found that the application to condone the delay and appeal are liable to be dismissed. It is stated in the order that the acquisition is for the purpose of railways and that the amount has already been deposited by the railways. It is only a mistake committed and really it was acquired for the purpose of national highway and the amount has not been deposited by the Government. It has also to be stated that paragraph 3 of the affidavit gives R.P. No. 708 OF 2010 IN L.A.A. No. 11 OF 2007 -:2:- the reason for the delay. It has to be stated that the explanation tendered is not satisfactory and therefore really there are no grounds to condone the delay. Therefore the R.P. lacks merit but the factual mistakes in the order requires correction. 2. The factual mistakes are that it is written as (1) “The acquisition is for the purpose of railways” and (2) “That apart, it is reported that the amount has already been deposited by the railways”. Instead of (1) the line should be “The acquisition is for the purpose of National Highway Bye pass” and the line shown as (2) be deleted. If copies are issued it may be recalled and fresh copies as stated be issued. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE. ul/-