IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 11TH DECEMBER 2009 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 RP.No. 948 of 2009() -------------------- (JUDGMENT DATED 16.9.2009 IN L.A.A.NO.1083 of 2009) REVIEW PETITIONER: PETITIONER/APPELLANT ------------------------------------------ THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.S.I.D.C., TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.D.KRISHNANKUTTY PILLAI RESPONDENTS: CLAIMANTS/1ST RESPONDENT --------------------------------------- 1. K.V.SAKUMTHALA @ SYMALA, VAYALIL HOME, P.O.MURIYAD, KUTHUPARAMBU. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (L.A.), INDUSTRIAL GROWTH CENTRE, THALASSERY. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN JJ. ----------------------------- R.P No. 948 of 2009 in L.A.A.No.1083 of 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 11th day of December, 2009. O R D E R PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J Our judgment dated 16.9.2009 is sought to be reviewed on the ground that the same is vitiated by an error apparent on the face of the judgment. Mr.Sheejo Chacko, the learned counsel for the review petitioner submits that we proceeded on the basis that the judgment in L.A.A.No. 319 of 2002 which was in approval of enhancement of land value from Rs.245/- to Rs.1,500/- per cent. On the basis of Annexures 1 and 2 judgments, it is submitted that what has been approved by this Court is only enhancement from Rs.245/- to Rs.1,500/- per cent. We have perused Annexures 1 and 2 and the judgment which was impugned in the present appeal, L.A.A.No.1083 of 2009. We are of the view that the judgment in L.A.A No.319 of 2002 could be a good precedent for dismissing the present appeal L.A.A No.1083 of 2009 at the admission stage. Since the appeals were dismissed at the admission stage, we are of the view that the review petition can be allowed even without R.P No. 948 of 2009 2 issuing notice to the appellant. We allow the review petition, recall the judgment dated 16.9.2009 and direct the registry to post the appeal for admission next week. In view of Section 68 of the Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act, the Registry is directed to refund the Court fee paid, less Rs.12/- to the counsel for the appellant. Sd/- PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE Sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE //True Copy// PA to Judge ab