Review petition dismissed because the record evidenced that the petitioner/3rd respondent was heard before the original order passed, correcting a citation/re-call error.
The review petition is dismissed; the impugned order is 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 K.VINOD CHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/21ST KARTHIKA, 1937
RP.No. 926 of 2015 (R) IN WP(C).30393/2006
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 30393/2006 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 13-02-2015
REVIEW PETITIONER/3RD RESPONDENT:
CHAVAKKAD RANGE KALLUCHETHU NADHYA VYAVASAYA
THOZHILALI SAMITHI MUTHUVATOOR, GURUVAYOOR, CHAVAKKAD TALUK THRISSUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY CONVENER VIJAYAN AGED 61 YEARS, S/O.KUTTAPPAN, CHALIPPATT HOUSE, P.O KANJANI THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT
RESPONDENTS/WRIT PETITIONER.RESPONDENTS 1 2, &4:
1. V.V.RAJEEVAN, AGED 30 YEARS S/O.VELAPPAN, VALAPPAD HOUSE, KANDANISSERY THRISSUR DISTRICT.
2. MADANAN
3. TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY O/O.TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
4. THE WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR-1 TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, THRISSUR.
5. KRISHNADAS, AGED 32 YEARS
BY ADVS.SRI.RENIL ANTO
SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN (SR.) SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
R.P. No.926 of 2015
In W.P(C). No.30393 of 2006
Dated this the 12th day of November, 2015.
O R D E R
The matter was posted to spoken to only on the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the writ petition that in fact the review petitioner was heard before the present orders were passed. A perusal of the order passed, now produced across the Bar, indicates that the review petitioner was heard. This Court has also head the learned Standing Counsel for the Board, who has got specific instructions that the review petitioner was heard.
In such circumstance, the review petition would stand dismissed. The order in R.P.926 of 2015 in WP(C) No.30393 of 2006 dated 21.10.2015 shall stand re-called.
Sd/-
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE.
// True Copy//
P.A. to Judge.
sp/12/11/15
CHAVAKKAD RANGE KALLUCHETHU NADHYA VYAVASAYA
V.V.RAJEEVAN
MADANAN
TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD
K. VINOD CHANDRAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
