IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT:- THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.V.K.BALI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.RAMACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2006 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1928 R.P.No.1046 of 2006 IN W.P.(C).NO.12514 OF 2006(M) -------------------------------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P.(C).12514/2006 DATED 25/09/2006 .................... PETITIONER/6TH RESPONDENT:- ------------------------------------- THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, TRICHUR. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER RESPONDENTS:- ------------------- 1. SREE HANUMAN KOVIL PUBLIC TRUST REPRESENTED BY SRI.K.R. RAMACHANRAN AGED 64 YEARS, S/O.KUTHOTHOOR RAMAKRISHNA BHATT, ADMINISTRATOR, SREE HANUMAN KOVIL, KOCHI-682 011. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE CORPORATION OF COCHIN, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 5. SRI.S. BALAN, SECRETARY, ERNAKULAM SIVA KSHETHRA RAKSHA SAMITHI, SIVA KRIPA, 1ST FLOOR, LAYAM ROAD, ERNAKULAM. 6. THE ERNAKULAM KSHETHRA KSHEMA SAMITHI RECOGNISED SAMITHI OF THE ERNAKULAM SIVA TEMPLE, DEVASWOM BUILDINGS, ERNAKULAM SIVA TEMPLE COMPLEX, KOCHI-11. 7. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. R1 BY ADV.SRI.T.P.KELU NAMBIAR (SR.) SRI.P.GOPINATH R2, R3 & R7 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.R.SABU. SRI.S.RAMESH BABU SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR SRI.V.GIRI THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/12/2006, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.Bali,C.J. & M.Ramachandran,J. ---------------------------------------------- R.P.No.1046 of 2006 in W.P.(C).No.12514 of 2006-M ----------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 21st day of December, 2006 ORDER V.K.Bali,C.J. (Oral) Heard Sri.M.Ramesh Chander for the petitioner, Senior Advocate Sri.T.P.Kelu Nambiar for the 1st respondent and Sri.M.R.Sabu, Senior Government Pleader for respondents 2, 3 and 7. 2. We have only observed in the judgment sought to be reviewed that Devaswom Board, in these proceedings, had not claimed it to be the owner of the adjacent land in dispute. That observation alone may not be enough to make this application for review, as nothing adverse with regard to ownership has been commented upon by us in the judgment sought to be reviewed. Dismissed. V.K.Bali Chief Justice M.Ramachandran Judge vku/-