IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE THURSDAY, THE 3RD JULY 2008 / 12TH ASHADHA 1930 RP.No. 600 of 2008(F) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.10559/2006 Dated 10/03/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN THE WP:- --------------------------------------------------------- T.BOSE,S/O THANKAPPAN, PARIPPALLYPURAYIDAM, KC VI.762, ULIYAKOVIL CHERRY, KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN THE WP:- ------------------------------------------------ 1. T.P. KUTTAPPAN, HOUSE NO.132, JANANI NAGAR, KADAPPAKADA, KOLLAM. 2. K.N.RAVIKUMAR, HOUSE NO.1, JANANI NAGAR, KADAPPAKKAD, KOLLAM. 3. PONNAMMA, W/O SUKUMARN, PUTHENPURA VAKKETHIL M.C. VI/753,KADAPPAKKADA KOLLAM. 4. PONNAMMA, W/O SUKUMARAN, PUTHENPURA VADAKKETHIL, M.C. VI/755, KADAPPAKADA KOLLAM 5. VIJAYAN, S/O KUNJAN, PUTHENPURA VADAKKETHIL, MC VI/755, KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM. 6. LEELA, W/O SAHADEVAN, PUTHENPURA VADAKKETHI, MC VI/754, KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM. RP.NO.600/08 7. BHADRAN, S/O NANU, PUTHENPURA VADAKKETHIL, MC VI/520,KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM. 8. B.RAJEEVAN, ASHA BHAVAN,AKSHYA NAGAR, KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM. 9. K.RAJENDRN, DONA BHAVAN, H.NO.164, VRINDAVAN NAGAR, KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM -8. 10. RAJENDRAN, ADMINISTRATOR, KUMARAVILASOM SNDP SAKHA YOGHAM NO.493, ULLIYKOVIL CHERRY, KADAPPAKKDA KOLLAM, 11.SASIDHARAN, S/O KUTTAN, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR KUMARAVILASAM SNDP NO. 493,BRANCH ULIYAKOVIL, KADAPPAKKD,KOLLAM. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P.NO.600 OF 2008 IN W.P.(c).No. 10559 of 2006 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2008 ORDER Even though Sri.B.Mohanlal, learned counsel for the review petitioner has addressed me very strenuously, I do not find any reason to invoke this court's jurisdiction under Order 47 Rule 1 for review. The essence of Sri.Mohanlal's contention is that no document whatsoever had been produced before the court below by the persons in whose favour the impugned order has been passed to show that they are having any legal interest in the matter or that they were the administrators of the SNDP yogam. As can be seen from my judgment, it is after reminding myself of the contours of the supervisory jurisdiction of this court under Article 227, that it was decided to confirm the order. I am not persuaded to review the judgment. It is however made clear that neither the impugned order passed by the learned Munsiff nor my judgment confirming the same will amount a finding that the additional respondents 10 and 11 impleaded under the RP.No.600/08 2 impugned order are the administrators of the SNDP branch. It is always open to the plaintiff during trial to establish that they have nothing to do with the SNDP branch. If judgment in the suit is not yet passed by the learned Munsiff, judgment will not be passed without perusing this order also. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv. RP.No.600/08 2