IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2009 / 8TH MAGHA 1930 RP.No. 38 of 2009 ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.25935/2008 Dated 16/09/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): PETITIONERS -------------------------------------------------------- 1. POOKKODAN JANAKI,POOKKODAN HOUSE, AZHIKODE,KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. P.SASIDHARAN,POOKKODAN HOUSE,AZHIKODE, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. M.SURESHAN, MULLAKANDY HOUSE, AZHIKODE VILLAGE,KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------------------------------- 1. THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, CENTRAL OFFICE,763, ANNA SALAI,CHENNAI-600002. 2. THE MANAGER, INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, NEELESWER BRANCH, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 3. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, REGIONAL OFFICE,CHEROOTY ROAD, KOZHIKODE-673001. BY SHRI P.B, SURESH KUMAR, SC, IOB. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- R.P.NO.38 OF 2009 IN W.P.C. NO. 25935 OF 2008 K -------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th January, 2009 ORDER This is a case where the petitioners approached this Court in a Writ Petition which was disposed of by the Judgment under review, permitting the petitioners to pay certain sums and also allowing them to avail the benefit of OTS. In default of payment, it was ordered that the sale could go on. 2. The Review Petition is filed pointing out that under Annexure I Judgment which the petitioners had obtained in an earlier Writ Petition, the petitioners had a right to go to the Tribunal and this fact was not known and the concession was made in the Judgment under review on the said basis. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners may be permitted to withdraw the Writ Petition. It is stated that the petitioners have already filed an application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the RP.38/09 IN WPC.25935/08K 2 respondent Bank would point out that the petitioners did not pay any amount as permitted and the sale took place of the properties and the sales were confirmed. In the circumstances of this case, I do not think that the petitioners have made out any ground for my exercising power of review inherent in Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Review Petition is dismissed. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge