Sudhakaran vs Vasanthakumari Amma
2021 Latest Caselaw 15660 Ker

RP No.464 of 2021 in
RCRev. 165 of 2019                        1

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
                                      &
               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
          TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 5TH SRAVANA, 1943
                            RP NO. 464 OF 2021
  AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN RCRev. 165/2019 OF HIGH COURT OF
                             KERALA, ERNAKULAM
REVIEW PETITIONER/REVISION PETITIONER:
           SUDHAKARAN,AGED 65 YEARS
           S/O APPUKUTTAN, THEJUS, KARICHIYAL, ATTINGAL,
           CHIRAYINKEEKIL TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

              BY ADV A.B.MOHANA KUMAR


RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
     1     VASANTHAKUMARI AMMA,W/O GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, RESIDING
           AT RAGHAVA BHAVAN, KARICHAYIL, CHITTATTINKARA DESAM,
           ATTINGAL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695101

      2       SIVA PRASAD, S/O GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, RESIDING AT
              RAGHAVA BHAVAN, KARICHAYIL, CHITTATTINKARA DESAM,
              ATTINGAL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 101.

      3       PREMEELA, D/O GOPALAKRISHNAN , RESIDING AT RAGHAVA
              BHAVAN, KARICHAYIL, CHITTATTINKARA DESAM, ATTINGAL
              VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 101.

      4       PRADEEP, W/O GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, RESIDING AT RAGHAVA
              BHAVAN, KARICHAYIL, CHITTATTINKARA DESAM, ATTINGAL
              VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 101.

              BY ADV D.KISHORE


       THIS    REVIEW   PETITION   HAVING     COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
27.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 RP No.464 of 2021 in
RCRev. 165 of 2019                        2

                                    O R D E R

Ziyad Rahman A.A., J.

This Petition is filed by the Revision

Petitioner seeking review of the order passed by

this Court in the above Rent Control Revision (RCR).

2. As per order dated 8.4.2021, the RCR was

dismissed by this Court imposing a cost of

Rs.10,000/- as this Court found that there were

gross misrepresentation and suppression of material

facts in the Revision Petition and the affidavit

filed to explain the delay of about 11 years in

filing the same.

3. Today, when the Review Petition is taken up

for consideration, there is no representation from

the Review Petitioner and only the counsel for the

respondents is present. We have gone through the

grounds raised in the Review Petition. It would

reveal that, practically the Review Petitioner is

seeking a re-hearing of RCR and none of the grounds

indicate any error apparent on the face of the RP No.464 of 2021 in

records warranting review under Section 114 of the

Code of Civil Procedure. The entire contentions

raised by the petitioner in the Review Petition were

already considered by this Court in detail and the

imposition of cost also was consciously made. The

reasons for imposition of cost are clearly mentioned

in the order itself.

In such circumstances, we do not think that the

grounds mentioned in the Review Petition calls

for any interference in the order passed in the

revision petition and, accordingly, it is dismissed

inlimine. We restrain ourselves from imposing any

costs on the Review Petition only since it is

dismissed inlimine.

Sd/-

K.VINOD CHANDRAN,JUDGE

Sd/-

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.,JUDGE

pkk