Kerala High Court
P.N.K.Ravi vs Abdul Rashed on 22 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JULY 2021 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1943
RP NO. 346 OF 2021
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 6901/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF
KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONERS:
1 P.N.K.RAVI
S/O.KARTHYANI AMMA, PADINJAREYIL HOUSE, MELADI
AMSOM, DESOM, KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
PIN - 673 305.
2 P.N.K.GEETHA
D/O.KARTHYANI AMMA, PADINJAREYIL HOUSE, MELADI
AMSOM, DESOM, KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
PIN - 673 305.
3 P.N.K.AJITHA
D/O.KARTHYANI AMMA, PADINJAREYIL HOUSE, MELADI
AMSOM, DESOM, KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
PIN - 673 305.
4 P.N.K.BINDU
D/O.KARTHYANI AMMA, PADINJAREYIL HOUSE, MELADI
AMSOM, DESOM, KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
PIN - 673 305.
5 P.N.K.SHYNI
D/O.KARTHYANI AMMA, PADINJAREYIL HOUSE, MELADI
AMSOM, DESOM, KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
PIN - 673 305.
BY ADV B.KRISHNAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 ABDUL RASHEED,
AGED 59 YEARS
S/O.ALLAPPI HAJI, BLOSSOM, VADAKARA AMSOM
DESOM, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
PIN - 673 101.
RP No.346 OF 2021 2
2 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.
3 DISTRICT COLLECTOR
CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673 020.
4 COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND SPECIAL DEPUTY
COLLECTOR (LNH)
KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673 020.
5 THE SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (LNH)
KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673 305.
6 NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA
OFFICE OF THE PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
UNIT,34/743-B,BEHIND POPULAR VEHICLE MARUTI
SHOWROOM,CIVIL STATION P.O KOZHIKODE-673020
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROJECT DIRECTOR
7 THE PROJECT OFFICER
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,OFFICE OF
THE PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT,34/743-
B,BEHIND POPULAR VEHICLE MARUTI SHOWROOM,CIVIL
STATION P.O KOZHIKODE-673020
(ADDL RESPONDENTS 10 AND 11 ARE IMPLEADED AS
PER ORDER DATED 19.03.2021 IN IA 2/2021).
SC,NHAI-SRI.MATHEWS K. PHILIP
R5-9 BY ADV. SHRI.R.PARTHASARATHY
SR.GP - SRI. SHAJAHAN T.K
SRI.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM)
SRI.PRASANTH M.P
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
RP No.346 OF 2021 3
ORDER
Respondents 5 to 9 in W.P.(C)No.6901 of 2021 has filed
this review petition under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking review of the judgment dated
25.03.2021 in that writ petition, which was closed based on
the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Paragraphs 5 to 7 and also the operative portion of that
judgment read thus;
"5. The learned counsel for respondents 5 to 9 would
submit that the said respondents claim only half of the
undivided share in the land having an extent of 7.871
Ares in Re.Sy.No.88/3B of Payyoli Village.
6. The learned Senior Government Pleader, on
instructions, would submit that the 4 th respondent
Special Deputy Tahasildar is yet to conduct the award
inquiry with notice to the persons interested.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit
that since the 4th respondent is yet to conduct award
enquiry with notice to the persons interested, this writ
petition may be closed recording the stand taken by
respondents 5 to 9 that they claim only half of the
undivided share in the land having an extent of 7.871
Ares in Re.Sy.No.88/3B of Payyoli Village.
In such circumstances, this writ petition is closed, based
on the above submission made by the learned counsel
for the petitioner."
2. In this review petition, it is averred that, there is
error apparent on the face of the judgment, warranting an
order of review under Order XLVII of Rule 1 of the Code.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the review
petitioners, the learned counsel for the 1 st respondent/writ
petitioner, the learned Senior Government Pleader for
respondents 2 to 5 and also the learned Standing Counsel for
the National Highway Authority of India, for respondents 6 and
7.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the review
petitioners/respondents 5 to 9 and also the learned counsel for
the 1st respondent/writ petitioner that the dispute between the
parties have already been settled and as such, recording the
said fact, this review petition can be dismissed as withdrawn.
Recording the aforesaid submission made by the learned
counsel on both sides, this review petition is dismissed as
withdrawn.
Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN
JUDGE
yd
