Thankamani v. Gangadharan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE FRIDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/6TH CHAITHRA, 1937 RP.No. 287 of 2015 () IN WP(C).6140/2015 ------------------------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 6140/2015 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 26-02-2015 REVIEW PETITIONER(S):

--------------------- THANKAMANI, W/O.UNNIKRISHNAN, THOZHUVANOOR P.O., THOZHUVANOOR AMSOM, VATTAPPARA, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL RESPONDENT(S):

-------------- 1.

GANGADHARAN, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, EDASSERY HOUSE, VATTAPPARA, THODUVANOOR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 552.

2.

SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VALANCHERY POLICE STATION, POST VALANCHERRY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 552.

R1 BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN R2 BY STATE ATTORNEY SRI.P.VIJAYARAGHAVAN THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ASHOK BHUSHAN, C.J & A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J ---------------------------------------------- R.P.No. 287 of 2015 in W.P(C).No.6140 of 2015 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th March, 2015

O R D E R

Shaffique, J.

This Review Petition has been filed by the second respondent inter alia contending that the petitioner had not disclosed the entire factual circumstances in the case. Perusal of the Writ Petition and the judgment would indicate that the suit filed as O.S.No.318 of 2011, which was pending before the Munsiff's Court, Thrissur, has become final. It is submitted by the review petitioner that the an appeal has been filed as A.S.No.86 of 2013 before the Subordinate Judge's Court, Thrissur, which had not been mentioned in the Writ Petition, which resulted in the aforesaid judgment.

2. Having gone through the judgment, we find that this Court disposed of the Writ Petition permitting the

RP.287/15 petitioner to approach the Police, if there is any obstruction caused in the matter. Of course, such direction will always be subject to further directions issued by the Sub Court in the matter.

3. In the said circumstances, we are of the view that there is no necessity to review the judgment. We only clarify that the Police action shall not be contrary to any directions that may be issued by the Sub Court in this regard. If the petitioner has any apprehension that the Police are unnecessarily interfering in the civil dispute, it is always open for the petitioner to appropriate remedy. With the above observation, the Review Petition is closed.

ASHOK BHUSHAN CHIEF JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE JUDGE vgs27/3/15