IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 22ND MAY 2008 / 1ST JYAISHTA 1930 RP.No. 511 of 2008() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN RSA.656/2006 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT -------------------------------------------------- V.PRASANTHA, W/O.ARUMUGHAN, VALLAYIL VEETTIL, MADATHUMKUTTIPARAMBA, CHERUVANNUR, P.O.KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS ----------------------------------- 1. V.PREMALATHA, W/O.SURESH BABU, 33/4828 A, ALARAMBATH MALAPPARAMBA, NOW RESIDING AT 4/1516, CHERKRIVALAPPU, CUSTOMS ROAD, KALATHINKUNNU AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. 2. V.PRASADINI, W/O.SEKHARAN, JAWAHAR NAGAR, THOTTADA, KANNUR DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT 36/433 B MOON LIGHT, VENGERI AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. 3. DR.V.RAMAPRASAD, S/O.VELAYUDHAN VAIDYAR, VADERI VEETTIL P.O., WEST HILL, EAST HILL ROAD, CALICUT. 4. V.JAYALAKSHMI, W/O.PEETHAMBARAN, KALATHIL PARAMBIL, 37/1608, AKARUVISSERY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 5. V.SUBRAMANIAN @ PREMAN, VADERI VEETTIL, P.O.WEST HILL, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 6. V.SUDHA, W/O.PARAMANANDAN, KUNIYIL HOUSE, P.O.PURAKKATTIRI, ATHOLI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 7. V.SAJITHA, W/O.NANDAN, PANANGAT, JAIL ROAD, PUTHIYARA P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.M.ASOKAN - R3 SRI DEVAPRASANTH P.J. “SRI. V.V.SURENDRAN - R5 SRI.P.A.HARISH SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON - R6 & R7 SRI.A.GIRISH KUMARAN SRI. K.B.GANESH SRI.ANIL GEORGE - R1 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== R.P.NO.511/2008 in R.S.A. NO. 656 OF 2006 =========================== Dated this the 22nd day of May 2008 ORDER This petition is filed under Order XLVII Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure to review the judgment passed on 3.8.2007 whereunder the second appeal was dismissed in limine. The case of the petitioner is that the appeal happened to be dismissed as this court took the view that appellant did not file a written statement when infact a written statement was filed. A copy of the petition filed to set aside the ex parte order as against him as well as copy of written statement produced along with that petition were produced in support of the submission. Annexure B, certified copy of the order in I.A.1793/2003 itself shows that petitioner was set ex parte as early as 29.9.2000 and that application was filed to set aside the ex parte order only on 13.6.2003 and that petition was dismissed as per separate order dated 16.6.2003. R.P.511/08 in R.S.A.656/06 2 Therefore eventhough petitioner had appeared earlier in the suit, she did not file a written statement and was set ex parte. Though three years after setting her ex parte, a petition to set aside the ex parte order was filed along with the written statement neither the petition was allowed nor the written statement was received. In such circumstance, it cannot be said that there is any apparent error in the judgment warranting review. The second appeal was dismissed for valid reasons. I find no substantial question of law involved in the appeal warranting any interference. In the absence of any apparent error or other sufficient reason, the review petition is dismissed. Review Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006