Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 4559
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S.DIAS, J
S. XAVIER – Appellant
Versus
JAYASEELAN – Respondent
RP NO. 456 OF 2023|OP(C) NO.494 OF 2023
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY
For the Respondents: SHRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
A review petition can be allowed if new facts are revealed that affect the original decision.
Headnote:The review petition aims to recall the judgment dated 14.03.2023. The petitioners assert that the original petition omitted relevant material facts. The court acknowledges that the suit in question was transferred, thus rendering the previous ruling redundant. The petition is allowed in light of these considerations as per paragraph 4.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the court considers relevant facts that affect judgment. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. the court acknowledges the implications of new findings. (Para 3 , 4) |
ORDER
Dated this the 21st day of January, 2026 The review petition is filed to recall the judgment dated 14.03.2023 passed in the original petition, whereby the Court of the Munsiff, Chittoor was ordered to dispose O.S No.158/2015 within three months after completion of pre-trial steps.
2. The review petitioners have stated in the memorandum of review petition that, the respondents in the review petition have not revealed material facts in the original petition. In fact, even prior to the filing of the original petition, the 1st respondent had filed TOP No.142/2022 before the District Court Palakkad, to transfer the above suit from the above court to the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Palakkad, to consolidate and jointly try the suit along with O.S No.149/2022. The transfer petition was allowed and the above suit was transferred to the Additional Subordinate Judge’s Court. Therefore, the judgment in the original petition had become redundant.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents.
4. The learned counsel for the respondents have not disputed the fact that the suit was transferred as mentioned above.
In light of the above submission, this review petition is allowed, by recalling the judgment dated 14.03.2023 in the original petition. This order shall not stand in the way of the parties working out their remedies in accordance with law. Sd/-
C.S.DIAS JUDGE NAB PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION AS TOP NO.142/2022 DATED 26-1-2022 PENDING ON THE FILES OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE, PALAKKAD
