K.T.Sankaran, J. W.P.(Crl.)No.214 of 2012 was disposed of by the judgment dated 20.6.2012. In that judgment, there is reference to the detailed order dated 29.5.2012 passed in the case and which was extracted in the judgment. In the order dated 29.5.2012, there is reference to a loan given by Kuriako Kuriakose to the 9th respondent. It is also recorded that the 9th respondent agreed to pay `12 lakhs with interest to Kuriako Kuriakose.
2. W.P.(Crl.)No.214 of 2012 was filed by the review petitioner for the issue of a writ of Habeas Corpus for the release of the Kuriako Kuriakose who was allegedly illegally detained by the respondents. In that writ petition, several interim orders were passed. One among them was the order dated 29.5.2012.
3. The review petition is filed to review the judgment dated 20.06.2012 and modify the judgment and also the order R.P.No.246 of 2013 2 dated 29.5.2012 and direct the 9th respondent to return/refund the admitted amount of `12 lakhs. The prayer in the review petition is unconnected with the W.P.(Crl.) and the reliefs prayed for therein. It is true that we thought of securing payment to Kuriako Kuriakose, the amount which was admittedly due from the 9th respondent. Though the 9th respondent agreed to pay, he has not fulfilled his promise. In these circumstances, there is no point in keeping the review petition pending. The review petition is closed with liberty to Kuriako Kuriakose to work out his remedies in accordance with law.
Sd/-
K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE ln /True copy/ P.A. to Judge