IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 6TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 17TH MAGHA 1930 RP.No. 164 of 2009(C) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.33838/2008 Dated 18/11/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS: ---------------------- 1. T.N.RADHAMANI, W/O.LATE KUMARA MENON, AGED 69 YEARS, THAIPARAMBIL HOUSE, P.O.UDAYAMPEROOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. M.K.SINDHU, D/O.LATE KUMARA MENON, THAIPARAMBIL HOUSE, P.O.UDAYAMPEROOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.P.VIJAYAKUMAR RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. V.G. VINAYAKUMARI, W/O. CHANDRAMOHANAN THEKKECHEPPEL, UDAYAMPEROOR P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682 307. 2. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REP: BY DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL CIRCULE, POWER HOUSE ROAD, KOCHI-682 018. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, THRIPUNITHURA. 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, UDAYAMPEROOR P.O., PIN-682 307. ADV. MR.P.CHANDRASEKHAR ADV. MR.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B FOR R2 TO 4 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` R.P. No. 164 OF 2009 in W.P.(C) No. 33838 OF 2008 C ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 6th day of February, 2009 O R D E R I heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned standing counsel for the Board and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 1st respondent. 2. By the judgment under review, this court had, after rejecting the contentions about the location of the transformer, only recorded the submission of the counsel for the Board that it is prepared to shift the post inside the road and directed to shift the post. The petitioners in this case have come forward with a case that they are owners of the property on the adjoining side and they are entered into an agreement of sale of a portion of the property. With regard to other locations suggested by the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned standing counsel submits that it may not be feasible. In the light of the same, I see no reason to consider the matter and the Review Petition fails and it is dismissed. (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) aks