IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2007 / 5TH SRAVANA 1929 RP.No. 699 of 2007(D) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.12002/2007 Dated 25/06/2007 OS.5/2002 of SUB COURT,KOTTARAKKARA .................... PETITIONER : RESPONDENT 1: ------------------------------ RAJENDRAN, S/O.THANKAPPAN NAIR, ANANDA BHAVANAM, PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.G.BALASUBRAMANIAN RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 2,3: ------------------------------------------ 1. ASHOK LEYLAND FINANCE LIMITED, 86, CHAMIERS ROAD, CHENNAI -18, REPRESENTED BY B.M.LAKSHMANAN, 34/138B, BYEPASS NORTH END, KOCHI-24. 2. KURUVILA ABRAHAM @ ANIYACHAN, ATTUMMEL VARAMBATH VEEDU, C/O. JOSE RAJ PETROL PUMP, PUNALUR, KOLLAM. 3. MANOJ.V., VINOD BHAVAN, PATHIRIKKAL MURI PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.K.K.RAJEEV R3 BY ADV SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/07/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ----------------------------- R.P.NO: 699 OF 2007 IN WP(C)No.12002 OF 2007 ----------------------------- Dated this the 27th July, 2007. O R D E R A review petition is filed raising the contention that the agreement is contrary to law and public policy and this has not been considered by this Court in its judgment dated 25.6.2007. I have already remitted back the matter to the court below for consideration and if the review petitioner wants to raise such a contention and if he has already raised it in his contentions, then the court below may go through the same and decide it in accordance with law, after hearing all the parties. To this extent the order is clarified. Review petition is disposed of accordingly. M.N.KRISHNAN Judge jj