S.L.Prasannan vs Geetha S.Das
2022 Latest Caselaw 3581 Ker

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 3581 Ker
Judgement Date : 24 March, 2022

Kerala High Court

S.L.Prasannan vs Geetha S.Das on 24 March, 2022

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH
 THURSDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 3RD CHAITHRA, 1944
                     RP NO. 74 OF 2022
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN FAO 38/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF
                           KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT:

         S.L.PRASANNAN
         AGED 44 YEARS
         S/O.SOMAN, SOMA SADHANAM, THEMPAMUTTOM,
         BALARAMAPURAM, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 501.
         BY ADVS.SRI. S.RAJEEV
                 SRI. K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN
                 SRI. V.VINAY


RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

    1    GEETHA S.DAS
         D/O.LATE SUSHEELADEVI, GEETHA GARDENS, TC 17/610,
         PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004.
    2    SHOBHA S.DAS
         D/O.LATE SUSHEELADEVI, GEETHA GARDENS, TC 17/610,
         PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004.
     THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 11.03.2022 ALONG WITH RP NO. 77 OF 2022, THE COURT
ON 24.03.2022 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH
 THURSDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 3RD CHAITHRA, 1944
                     RP NO. 77 OF 2022
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN FAO 39/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF
                           KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT:

         S.L.PRASANNAN
         AGED 44 YEARS
         S/O.SOMAN, SOMA SADHANAM, THEMPAMUTTOM,
         BALARAMAPURAM, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 501.
         BY ADVS.SRI. S.RAJEEV
                 SRI. K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN
                 SRI. V.VINAY


RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

    1    GEETHA S.DAS
         D/O.LATE SUSHEELADEVI, GEETHA GARDENS, TC 17/610,
         PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004.
    2    SHOBHA S.DAS
         D/O.LATE SUSHEELADEVI, GEETHA GARDENS, TC 17/610,
         PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004.
     THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 11.03.2022 ALONG WITH RP NO. 74 OF 2022, THE COURT
ON 24.03.2022 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 R.P. Nos.74 & 72 of 2022
                                -:3:-




                            MARY JOSEPH, J.
              ----------------------------
               R.P. No.74 of 2022 in FAO No. 38 of 2021
                                 and
               R.P. No.77 of 2022 in FAO No. 39 of 2021
              ----------------------------
                Dated this the 24th day of March, 2022


                             ORDER

These Review Petitions are filed against judgment dated

05.07.2021 in FAO Nos. 38 and 39 of 2021 under Section 114

read with Order XLVII Rule 1, read with Section 151 of the Code

of Civil Procedure, 1908.

2. Both the above appeals have been dismissed by this

Court vide judgment passed on 05.07.2021. The review petitions

have been filed seeking review for the reason that in the counter

filed by the respondent it is contended that the delay was

calculated wrongly. It was on account of an inadvertent omission

that the delay was calculated mistakenly. It was further

contended that there was no willful latches or negligence on the

part of the petitioner but on account of reasons beyond his R.P. Nos.74 & 72 of 2022

control, those situations had arisen. Accordingly one more

opportunity to conduct the trial in the suit is sought after setting

aside the abatement on conditions as it deem fit and proper.

3. Under Order XLVII Rule 1 review is permissible if any

person considering himself aggrieved from the discovery of a new

and important matter or evidence which after the exercise of due

diligence was not within his knowledge or could not be produced

by him at the time when the decree was passed or order was

made, or on account of some mistake or error apparent on the

face of the record, or for any other sufficient reason.

This Court found on a reading of the review petition that

none of the grounds projected under Order XLVII Rule 1 are

made out. In the said circumstances, review petitions are liable

to fail and hence dismissed.

Sd/-

MARY JOSEPH, JUDGE.

ttb R.P. Nos.74 & 72 of 2022

APPENDIX OF RP 74/2022

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES :

Annexure A THE TRUE COPY OF THE TREATMENT CERTIFICATE DATED 17/03/2015 ISSUED BY DR.A.ABDUL BARY.

Annexure B THE TRUE COPY OF THE TREATMENT CERTIFICATE DATED 10/11/2020 ISSUED BY DR.R.JAYAKUMAR OF SRI.RAMAKRISHNA ASHRAM CHARITABLE HOSPITAL, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

Annexure C THE TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY DATED 28/09/2015 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

Annexure D THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 24/09/2010 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER AND HIS FATHER BY THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK.

Annexure E THE TRUE COPY OF THE AUCTION NOTICE DATED 17/03/2014 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK.

Annexure F THE TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF THE FATHER OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE NEYYATTINKARA MUNICIPALITY. Annexure G THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE PROCEEDING SHEET IN I.A.NO.4039/2015 IN O.S.NO.453/2004.