IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 6TH MARCH 2008 / 16TH PHALGUNA 1929 CRP.No. 200 of 2008() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31/10/2007 IN IA.193/06 IN AS.148/2000 of SUB COURT,NEYYATTINKARA .................... REVN. PETITIONER: PETITIONERS ----------------------------- 1. RAVIKUMAR, S/O.GANGADHARAN, AGED 51 YRS. RESIDING AT GANGASARAS, T.C. 16/1237 CHANGAZHASSERY MURI, THYCAUD VILLAGE. 2. BABY GIRIJA, D/O.DEVAKI, AGED 46 YRS. RESIDING AT GANGASARAS, T.C. 16/1237 CHANGAZHASSERY MURI, THYCAUD VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.J.S.AJITHKUMAR RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS ------------------------ 1. SREEDHARAN, S/O.KESAVAN NADAR AMBALAMVAIPIZHA VALIYAVILA VEEDU KIDARAKUZHI, VIZHINJAM DESO AND VILLAGE. 2. J. PADMINI ARUTHALAMPATTU PANTHADIKKALAM VEEDU PUNALAL P.O., KONNIYOOR MURI NEDUMANGADU VILLAGE. 3. S.N.MRINALINI AMBALAMVAIPICHA VALIYAVILA VEEDU, KIDARAKUZHI VIZHINJAM DESOM AND VILLAGE 4. S.N. MOHAN RAJ AMBALAMVAIPICHA VALIYAVILA VEEDU, KIDARAKUZHI VIZHINJAM DESOM AND VILLAGE 5. S.N. PRAMEELA AMBALAMVAIPICHA VALIYAVILA VEEDU, KIDARAKUZHI VIZHINJAM DESOM AND VILLAGE. 6. S.N. JEEJAMOL AMBALAMVAIPICHA VALIYAVILA VEEDU, KIDARAKUZHI VIZHINJAM DESOM AND VILLAGE. 7. LEELA, D/O.JANAKI THANNININNAVILA VEEDU, KIDARAKKUZHY VIZHINJAM DESOM, KOTTUKAL VILLAGE. 8. J. CHELLAMMA, PORIYANAMVILA VEEDU SICILYPURAM, VENGANNOOR DESOM THIRUVALLAM VILLAGE. 9. SOBHANA KUMARI, PORIYANAMVILA VEEDU SICILYPURAM, VENGANNOOR DESOM, THIRUVALLAM VILLAGE. 10. G. SASIKUMAR, PORIYANAMVILA VEEDU SICILYPURAM, VENGANNOOR DESOM, THIRUVALLAM VILLAGE. 11. SIVA KUMAR, PORIYANAMVILA VEEDU SICILYPURAM, VENGANNOOR DESOM, THIRUVALLAM VILLAGE 12. C. SHEELA, PORIYANAMVILA VEEDU SICILYPURAM, VENGANNOOR DESOM, THIRUVALLAM VILLAGE 13. SAROJINI, D/O.ROSAMMA AMBALAM VAIPICHA VALIYAVILA VEEDU KIDARAKKUZHY, VIZHINJAM DESOM. 14. S. JAYA, D/O. ROSAMMA AMBALAM VAIPICHA VALIYAVILA VEEDU KIDARAKKUZHY, VIZHINJAM DESOM. 15. S. SUJA, D/O.ROSAMMA AMBALAM VAIPICHA VALIYAVILA VEEDU KIDARAKKUZHY, VIZHINJAM DESOM. 16. SANTHAKUMARI, D/O.JANAKI BIJU BHAVAN, POTTAKULAM, KANJIRAMKULAM DESOM AND VILLAGE. 17. DEVAKI, D/O.JANAKI SOBHANAVILASOM VEEDU, POOMKULAM, VELLAYANI THIRUVALLAM VILLAGE. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- C.R.P. NO. 200 OF 2008 --------------------- Dated this the 6th day of March, 2008 ORDER This revision petition is preferred against the order of the Subordinate Judge, Neyyattinkara to dispose of IA 193/06 in AS 148/00. It was an application for amendment of the decree. The court below dismissed it on the ground that since an appeal and a second appeal has been preferred, that courts decree has merged with the decree of the appellate court and therefore it cannot entertained the matter. 2. Learned counsel has brought to my notice a Full Bench of this court in Thomas v. Kunjamma & another [2005 (3) KLJ (FB) 327] wherein this court has clearly held that when the decree of the trial court is taken up in an appeal and has merged into an appellate court, the appellate court alone has the power to correct the decree. It is seen that a final disposal of the matter was done by this court in RSA 199/06 dismissing the appeal at the admission stage. Therefore it is only appropriate to file an application before this court. I also have no hesitation to hold that it is a mistake that has to be corrected for the reason that the decree is drafted very much against the C.R.P. NO.200/08 2 judgment, which has not been taken note of by any of the authorities. In the judgment it is very clearly stated in para 18 that plaint A schedule item No.1 except the written statement A schedule property is to be partitioned. But when the decree is drafted it appears that the translation given is to effect the partition of the property of defendants 8 and 9 in the written statement. It is unfortunate that it was not noted by any of the authorities till this time. So it requires correction. Therefore I dispose of the civil revision petition with permission to the present revision petitioners to move an application before this court for correction of the decree in accordance with law. Since I have passed the final judgment in RSA, it can be send to this court for correction. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps C.R.P. NO.200/08 3