The High Court of Kerala dismissed a review petition filed by Dr. M.P. Kannan seeking recall of a judgment that had allowed a writ appeal. The Court held the petition was an appeal in disguise and contained no error apparent on the face of the record.
The review petition is dismissed and the impugned judgment is not recalled or reconsidered.
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 C.T.RAVIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.JYOTHINDRANATH
WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2015/22ND ASWINA, 1937
RP.No. 849 of 2015 () IN WA.617/2010
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WA 617/2010 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 02-09-2015
REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT:
DR.M.P.KANNAN
S/O.M.P.KANNAN PANICKER, PROFESSOR DEPARTMENT OF CHEMISTRY, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT CALICUT UNIVERSITY PO, CALICUT.
BY ADVS.SRI.T.KRISHNANUNNI (SR.) SRI.R.RAMADAS
RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS:
POST CALICUT UNIVERSITY PIN-673 635.
BY ADV.SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW,SC,CALICUTY UNIVERSITY
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-10-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
C.T.RAVIKUMAR & K.P.JYOTHINDRANATH, JJ.
R.P.No.849 of 2015 in W.A.No.617 of 2010
Dated 14th October, 2015
ORDER
Ravikumar, J.
This review petition is filed seeking review of the judgment of this Court dated 2.9.2015 in W.A.No.617 of 2010. The said writ appeal was disposed of along with a batch of writ petitions as per a common judgment. In fact, the writ appeal was allowed and the connected writ petitions were dismissed. We have carefully gone through the grounds A' to F' raised in the review petition. Having gone through the same, we have no hesitation to say that the review petition is virtually an appeal in disguise as they essentially mount challenge against the correctness of the findings and conclusions in the judgment sought to be reviewed. What is the error apparent on the face of it, has not been brought out. In short, no ground to persuade this Court to invoke the review jurisdiction has been made out. Therefore, we do not find any reason to admit the review petition and to recall the judgment and to consider the matter afresh. In the said
2
R.P.No.849/2015 in W.A.No.617/2010
circumstances, this review petition has to fail and accordingly, it is
dismissed.
Sd/-
C.T.RAVIKUMAR
Judge
Sd/-
K.P.JYOTHINDRANATH
Judge
TKS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should admit a review petition where no error apparent on the face of the impugned judgment has been brought out.
Dr. M.P. Kannan
University of Calicut
C.T. Ravikumar
K.P. Jyothindranath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
