Review petition allowed as judgment vitiated by factual error apparent on record. Petition established residence in Pozhuthana Village while Ext. P2 was incorrectly addressed to 3rd respondent.
Review petition allowed; original judgment recalled.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
TUESDAY, THE 26TH AUGUST 2008 / 4TH BHADRA 1930
RP.No. 911 of 2008(B)
--------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.12613/2008 Dated 10/04/2008
REVIEW PETITINERS : PETITIONERS.
-----------------
1. KUNJAMMA, K., NELLIKKUNNUMMEL HOUSE, POZHUTHANA P.O., WAYANAD.
2. VASANTHA, N., MANACKAL HOUSE, POZHUTHANA P.O., WAYANAD.
BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN
RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS
-------------
1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WAYANAD, CIVIL STATION, WAYANAD.
2. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, WYTHIRI, WAYANAD DISTRICT.
3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ACHURANAM VILLAGE, POZHUTHANA VILLAGE, POZHUTHANA, WAYANAD.
BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA.
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.P. No. 911 of 2008 in W.P.(C) No. 12613 OF 2008B
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 26th day of August 2008
O R D E R
Counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner
was a resident of the Pozhuthana Village, it was by a mistake of fact that Ext. P2 application was made to the 3rd respondent on the basis of which relief was sought in the writ petition and judgment was rendered. Now that the learned counsel for the petitioner himself confesses about the factual mistake which led to the judgment, I am satisfied that the judgment is vitiated due to a factual error apparent on the face of the record. Accordingly, the Review Petition is allowed and the judgment is recalled.
ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE
jan/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to allow the review of the original judgment due to a factual error apparent on the face of the record.
KUNJAMMA, K.
VASANTHA, N.
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WAYANAD
THE TAHSILDAR, WYTHIRI
THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ACHURANAM
ANTONY DOMINIC
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
