IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2011 / 2ND ASHADHA 1933 RP.No. 423 of 2011(L) -------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.36512/2010 Dated 28/02/2011 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): 3RD RESPONDENT IN WP ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (A) NATIONAL HIGHWAY, COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ARAVIND KUMAR BABU.T.K. RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER IN THE WRIT PETITION ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ANTONY BEN, SON OF VARGHESE ANTONY, PARANKIMAMVILA VEEDU, MANGAD VILLAGE, MANGAD CHERRY, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV.SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------- R.P No.423 OF 2011 IN W.P.(C) NO.36512 OF 2010 -------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of June 2011 ORDER This Review Petition has been filed at the instance of the State, referring to subsequent turn of events after the Award passed by the Lok Adalath, which was sought to be executed by giving appropriate directions to the respondents in the Writ Petition, to have released the amount due to the Writ Petitioner. 2. The Writ Petition was disposed of as per judgment dated 28-02-2011, giving a positive direction in the above regard. Ext.P3 Award passed by the Lok Adalath was pursuant to the judgment/decree passed by the Sub Court, Kollam in L.A.R No.7/1998, wherein some mistake had crept in, which has already been corrected, on allowing the petition for correction. Filing of the petition (Annexure I) could not be brought to the notice of this Court when the matter was disposed of on 28-02-2011. 3. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the review petitioner submits that the matter was considered by the Sub Court and the judgment/decree was corrected on 14-03-3011 (Annexure II); by virtue of which, no further amount is liable to be paid to the writ petitioner, which has necessitated the review. R.P No. 423/2011 - 2 - 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respondent unit/petitioner as well, who submits that the facts and circumstances stated in the Review Petition are correct and that the Review Petition can be allowed. 5. In the said circumstances, the Review Petition is allowed. The judgment dated 28-02-2011 is recalled and the Writ Petition is dismissed. It is made clear that, this will not stand in the way of the writ petitioner, if at all the writ petitioner is aggrieved of the corrections made by the Sub Court as per Annexure II, pursuing the other appropriate steps in accordance with the relevant provisions of law. vdv P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE