Thomas P. Joseph, J.

In this proceeding, the question raised for a decision is to the procedure to be followed once the Court grants a review of its judgment/order.

2. The land belonging to the petitioner, common in both the cases, was acquired by the respondents and based on determination of compensation for the adjoining lands petitioner made a claim to the District Collector under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act (for short, "the Act"). The District Collector made an award with which petitioner was not satisfied and thereon, invoking subsection 3 of the said provision he requested a reference to the Civil Court for adjudication of his claim. Accordingly, reference was made and learned Sub Judge, Payyannur took the reference on file as L.A.R.Nos.18 and 19 of 2008 and after hearing parties, passed a common judgment dated September 30, 2009. Petitioner thought that there was error apparent on the face of the record in the common judgment in that certain statutory benefits which he is otherwise entitled to get have not been considered by the learned Sub Judge. Thereon, petitioner filed Exts.P2, applications (in both the cases) for review of the common judgment under R