IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 3RD OCTOBER 2011 / 11TH ASWINA 1933 RP.No. 695 of 2011(K) ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.9309/2011 Dated 17/06/2011 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S) /PETITIONER IN WPC: ------------------------------------------------------------------- P.C. THOMAS, S/O. CHACKO, PALAPARAMBIL, KOTTATHARA PO., AGALI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT BY ADVS. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA SMT.RASHMI RAVINDRAN RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS IN WPC: ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE CHIEF MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE, 3H AVENUE, WEST FORT ROAD, PALAKKAD – 678 001. 2. THE MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, AGALI BRANCH, ATTAPPADI, PALAKKAD – 678 581. BY SRI. N. RAJAGOPALAN NAIR., SC., FOR R1 AND R2 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: DS RP.No. 695 of 2011(K) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: A1: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION SENT BY THE BANK DATED 10-06-2011. A2: COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF PAYMENT OF 2/-LAKHS DATD 4.6.2011. A3: COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR ONE TIME SETTLEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER DT. 24.5.2011. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE DS C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ----------------------------------------------- Review Petition No.695 of 2011 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of October, 2011 O R D E R --------------- It is contended by the petitioner that Annexure-A1 letter was issued by the respondent Bank without noticing the judgment, dt. 17.6.2011, and that the directions contained in the judgment was not complied with. 2. Learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondents conceded that Annexure-A1 letter was issued without noticing the judgment and it was issued before the judgment could be communicated to the respondents by the standing counsel. 3. Eventhough the challenge against Annexure-A1 is not a matter strictly coming within the scope of a review, on the basis of the factual situation conceded as above, I allow the review petition and quash Annexure-A1. 4. The respondents will consider the matter afresh in view of the directions contained in the judgment dt. 17.6.2011 and pass fresh orders. The restrain imposed against recovery steps will continue to be operative till a fresh decision is taken. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb