The court determined that the inability to serve notice and absence of petitioners warranted closure of the review petition.

ORDER

This review petition is preferred against the judgment dated 20.06.2005, by which the C.R.P filed by the 1st respondent was allowed by setting aside the order dated 15.10.1993 of the Principal Sub Court, North Paravur, in I.A.No.6020/1993 in O.S.No.261/1991. Respondents 2 and 4 have filed this review petition contending that, there is a mistake on the face of the record that the amount cannot be ordered from the respondents in any respect. According to the revision petitioner, respondents 2 and 4 stands discharged since the 1^st respondent had settled their claim against him.

2. This Court by order dated 10.10.2025 had ordered notice to the 1^st respondent through the process server attached to the jurisdictional court. As per report dated 20.12.2025, the learned District Judge has reported that notice could not be served on the 1^st respondent since the 1^st respondent had wound up the business and the Managing Director has expired.

In such circumstances, this Court finds that, it will be impossible for this Court to proceed further in this review petition. Added to that, none appears for the review petitioners today. Hence, this review petition is closed.

Sd/-