IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 23RD FEBRUARY 2010 / 4TH PHALGUNA 1931 RP.No. 594 of 2009(H) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.37456/2007 DATED 6.3.2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): PETITIONERS IN WPC: ----------------------------------------- 1. NARAYANAN NAIR, S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, KOLLAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, MARADY NORTH KARA, MARADY VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK. 2. CHANDRAN, S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR, DO, DO. BY ADV. SRI.BOBBY MATHEW KOOTHATTUKULAM RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS IN WPC: ---------------------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION, MUVATTUPUZHA. 2. GEORGE, S/O.THARIAN, KIZHINJALIL HOUSE, TAGOR NAGAR, N.G.O.QUARTERS, MUVATTUPUZHA - 686 661 3. GEORGE, S/O.JOSEPH, MANNATHOOKARAN HOUSE, PRESIDENT, TAGOR NAGAR RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION, TAGOR NAGAR, N.G.O.QUARTERS, MUVATTUPUZHA.- 686 661 4. SUKUMARAN NAIR, S/O.MADHAVAN PILLAI, DRAUPADHY NILAYAM, (VELANKUDI) HOUSE, SECRETARY, TAGOR NAGAR RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION, TAGOR NAGAR, NGO QUARTERS, MUVATTUPUZHA 686 661. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.R.BINDU FOR RI ADV.SRI. V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR) FOR R2&R3 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. ------------------------------ R.P. No.594/2009 IN W.P.(C) No.37456/2007 ------------------------------ Dated this, the 23rd day of February, 2010 Order Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioners have filed this Review Petition, seeking review of the judgment of this Court in W.P.(C) No.37456/2007, on the ground that respondents 2 to 4 have wrongly stated before this Court the dates on which the 2nd respondent has filed Exts.R2(b) and R2(c) objections. They have given the dates of those documents as the dates of filing them. But, the review petitioners pointed out that in fact, those objections were filed only long thereafter. Therefore, they pray for review of the judgment. 2. We notice that the decision of this Court in the judgment under review was not rested on the date of filing of the objections mentioned above, but on other grounds. Therefore, the above error brought to our notice has no bearing RP 594/2009 - 2 - on the final decision. So, based on that ground, the judgment cannot be reviewed. Accordingly, the Review Petition is dismissed. K. Balakrishnan Nair, Judge. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. nm.