The High Court of Kerala dismissed a review petition challenging a judgment which held the petitioner liable under a guarantee despite pending litigation by the principal debtor against the same respondent regarding a different transaction.
The review petition is dismissed as it has no sustenance.
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 SHAJI P.CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1940
RP.No. 236 of 2018 IN WPC. 17030/2012
REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER NO.2:
TATHAKUTTY. W/O.(LATE) UNNIKRISHNAN K.C., AGED 74, 'PARPIDAM', ALANKODE, OLAVAKODE P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678002.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN SRI.P.M.NEELAKANDAN SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN SRI.SABU GEORGE
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
1. KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD.,
2. S.SELVARAJ,
3. KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD.,
4. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR),
BY SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-04-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
RP.No. 236 of 2018 IN WPC. 17030/2012
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE A: TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR RECEIPT OF MONEY EVIDENCING PAYMENTS MADE BY PETITIONER'S LATE HUSBAND TO RESPONDENT NO.4 DATED 29.3.2012
RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL ---------------------
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
dlk/6/4/18
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
R.P. No. 236 of 2018
in
WP(C)No.17030 of 2012
Dated this the 6th day of April, 2018
ORDER
This review petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to
review the judgment dated 9.2.2018, on the ground that, petitioner later came to know that WP(C)No.5170/2015 filed by
the principal debtor is pending before this Court in respect of the very same transaction. Therefore, the aforesaid writ petition is
also posted today along with the review petition.
other than the mortgage executed in the RP. Any how, in my
considered opinion in the judgment while holding that the review
R.P. No. 236 of 2018 in
2
WP(C)No.17030 of 2012
petitioner is also liable, in view of the guarantee offered, it was also directed that if the principal debtor is having sufficient property, the same shall also be proceeded with. In my considered opinion there is no error apparent on the face of the record or any other illegality enabling this Court to review the
judgment.
Therefore the review petition has no sustenance, the same
is dismissed.
Sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE
dlk/6/4/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether there is any error apparent on the face of the record or illegality enabling the Court to review the original judgment.
TATHAKUTTY. W/O. UNNIKRISHNAN K.C.
KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD.
S.SELVARAJ
SHAJI P. CHALY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
