IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1930 CRP.No. 802 of 2008(B) ----------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 07/07/2008 IN IA 4031/2007 IN AS.66/2004 of ADL.SUB COURT, THALASSERY .................... REVN. PETITIONER/REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT/D2 : ---------------------------------------------------------------------- K.V.GOPI, S/O.KANNAN, 57 YEARS, DRIVER KUNNUMMAL VALAPPIL, MANIYOOR AMSOM, VESALA DESOM KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.R.SURENDRAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/PLALINTIFF & D3 & 5 TO 8 : ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. PK.KARUNAKARAN, S/O.KANNAN PULLAN, 64 YEARS, COOLIE, ALATHUMCHALIL HOUSE MANIYOOR AMSOM, VESALA DESOM, KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR. 2. LAKSHMI , W/O.P.K.KARUNAKARAN AGED 52 YEARS,ALATHUMCHALIL HOUSE, MANIYOOR AMSOM, VESALA DESOM, KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR. 3. LALITHA, D/O.KALLYANI, 46 YEARS, CHANDRATHIL HOUSE, CHEKKIKULAM PO., KANNUR TALUK KANNUR. 4. LOHITHAKSHAN, S/O.KALLYANI, 39 YEARS, CHANDRATHIL HOUSE, CHEKKIKULAM PO., KANNUR TALUK KANNUR. 5. LATHA, D/O.KALLYANI, 37 YEARS CHANDRATHIL HOUSE. CHEKKIKULAM.PO., KANNUR TALUK KANNUR. 6. SAJEEVAN, S/O.KALLYANI, 34 YEARS, CHANDRATHIL HOUSE, CHEKKIKULAM PO., KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRP.No. 802 of 2008(B) ORDER ON I.A.NO.2509 OF 2008 IN C.R.P.NO.802 OF 2008 DISMISSED 11.11.2008 SD/- K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE -TRUE COPY- P.A. TO JUDGE pac K.P. BALACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------- C.R.P No. 802 of 2008 ------------------------------ Dated this the 11th day of November, 2008 O R D E R Grievance of the petitioner is that the Sub judge who disposed of A.S. No.66 of 2004 on the file of the Addl. Subordinate Judge's Court, has not considered certain grounds taken in the appeal memorandum. It is not known whether those were actually urged before the appellate court while advancing arguments. However, those matters have to be considered in second appeal and not in revision filed against the order dismissing the review petition. This C.R.P is hence dismissed. K.P. BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE scm