IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 18TH JULY 2008 / 27TH ASHADHA 1930 RP.No. 582 of 2008(C) ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.861/2007 Dated 03/03/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/ PETITIONER : ---------------------------------------------------- A.J.VARGHESE, AVIYOTTU VEEDU, NEAR L.M.S.HOSPITAL, KUNDARA P.O, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR SRI.BINDU SREEKUMAR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS : ---------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO HOME (C) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTARAKKARA. 3. GEORGE KUNJACHAN, S/O KOSHY GEORGE, MANAPPALLY THADATHIL PEEDIKAYIL VEEDU, MEENPIDIPARA, PULAMON.P.O, KOTTARAKKARA. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL ADV.SRI.BABU CHERUKARA THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: pac K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ ========================================== R.P.No. 582 of 2008 in W.P.(C).No. 861 of 2007 ==================== Dated this the 18th day of July, 2008. O R D E R BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J The writ petitioner seeks review of the judgment in W.P.(C).No.861/2007, which was dismissed by us on 3.3.2008. Learned senior counsel submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the following observation made by us in the judgment under review. “We feel that the threat to the petitioner and his workmen arises only when the petitioner asserts his right over the property” 2. Learned senior counsel points out that the petitioner was always in possession of the property and he is enjoying the same all throughout. We clarify that we have not said anything against the claim of the petitioner regarding his possession or his right over the property. If the petitioner moves the civil court for any relief, the court will be free to take a decision on the dispute before it in R.P.No. 582 of 2008 2 accordance with law untrammeled by the observation made by this court in the judgment under review. Review petition is disposed of as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE bkn/-