IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH MARCH 2008 / 22ND PHALGUNA 1929 R.P.No. 272 of 2008(B) --------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.17021/2007 Dated 23/10/2007 OPMV.1333/1993 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM ..................................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4: 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, EDAKKATTUVAYAL VILLAGE, ARAKKUNAM P.O., MULAMTHURUTHY VIA., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI. I.V. PRAMOD RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 5 & 6: 1. CHACKO @ KOCHACKO, S/O. PAILY, MOOLETHADATHIL HOUSE, ARAKKUNNAM,EDAKKATTUVAYAL VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. M.K. ULAHANNAN, S/O. KURIAKKO, MANAKKATTU HOUSE, EDAKKATTUVAYAL, ARAKKUNNAM P.O., MULAMTHURUTHY VIA., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. SURESH, S/O. DAMODARAN, THARIKKARAYIL HOUSE, UZHAKKODU KARA, EDAKKATTUVAYAL VILLAGE, ARAKKUNNAM P.O., MULAMTHURUTHY VIA., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.K. ABDUL RAHIM, R1 SRI. BIJU C. ABRAHAM, R2 & R3 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING C OME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== R.P.No.272 OF 2008 IN W.P.(C) NO. 17021 OF 2007 B ==================== Dated this the 12th day of March, 2008 O R D E R The writ petition was disposed of by judgment dated 23rd October, 2007 directing that the attachment of the movables of the 5th respondent shall be lifted. The review has been filed by the petitioners herein stating that the movables were already sold on 22/9/07. When the matter was taken up for hearing, none has a case that the statement of the petitioners herein regarding the sale of the movables is incorrect. It has also come out during submissions that the sale proceeds of the movables are in deposit before the MACT, Ernakulam, which considered OP(MV) No.1333/93. If that be so, the only direction now called for is that the 2nd respondent herein, whose properties were attached and sold, will be free to get the sale proceeds now in deposit withdrawn. RP 272/08 :2 : Leaving it open to the 2nd respondent to make appropriate application for withdrawal of the sale proceeds now in deposit as noticed above, the review petition is disposed of. ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE. Rp