Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, P. V. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ
A.M. Subair – Appellant
Versus
M.V. Joy – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition seeks review of prior judgment. (Para 1) |
| 2. advocates present arguments for both sides. (Para 2) |
| 3. court discusses limits of review. (Para 3) |
| 4. clarifies standard for errors in review. (Para 4) |
P.V. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ.
…....................................................................
R.P.No.1325 of 2025 in W.A.No.248 of 2024 …....................................................................
Dated this the 30th day of January, 2026 ORDER This review petition is filed by the 1st respondent in W.A.No.248 of 2024, seeking review of the judgment dated
27.08.2025, passed in it.
2. Heard Adv. Ranjith Thampan, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the review petitioner and Adv. S. Sreekumar, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent.
3. The writ appeal was disposed of on merits as per judgment dated 27.08.2025. What the review petitioner attempts, in the review petition by raising the grounds as stated therein, and especially grounds 'C' to 'G' is nothing, but a rehearing of the appeal on merits, which is impermissible.
4. The Hon'ble Apex Court has time and again categorically held that a review is not to be an attempted rehearing of appeal in
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
