G PADMA Vs. BAVINENI VIJAYA LAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ Petn. No. 10107 of 1993 was disposed of on 18-2-1994 by a Division Bench of this Court consisting of V. Sivaraman Nair and S. V. Maruthi, JJ. V. Sivaraman Nair, J. demitted office subsequent to the delivery of the verdict. Obviously enabled by the provisions of Order XLVII, Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') the first respondent in the writ petition preferred Review W.P.M.P. No. 7269 of 1994. Since V. Sivaraman Nair, J. was not available to deal with the review petition along with S.V. Maruthi, J., the review petition was posted before S. V. Maruthi, J. and the learned Judge after having admitted the review petition, heard and disposed it of on 28-4-1994. The appellant in this writ appeal, though not a party to the writ petition and the review petition, has got a grievance over the decision of S.V. Maruthi, J. in the review petition. Thus, the appellant has preferred this writ appeal. A doubt was felt with regard to the maintainability of the writ appeal and the writ appeal was entertained subject to the scrutiny of the question concerning its maintainability. Accordingly, we are obliged to consider the question-of the maintainability of this writ appeal first before we could go anywhere near the merits therein.

(2.) As we have already noted, the verdict in the writ petition was one delivered by a Bench of this Court consisting of V. Sivaraman Nair and S.V. Maruthi, JJ. Since V. Sivaraman Nair, J. could not be available to hear and deal with the review petition along with S.V. Maruthi, J. the review petition was dealt with only by S.V. Maruthi J. Order XLVII, Rule 5 of the Code, which enables this, reads as follows:--

(3.) The implications of the rule are patent and unambiguous. If the Judge or Judges or any one of the Judges, who made the original verdict, a review of which is sought for, continues or continue to be attached to the Court, when the review petition is being dealt with and is not precluded by the factors contemplated in the rule from considering it, then the review petition shall be dealt with by such Judge, or Judges or any one of them alone and no other Judge or Judges shall deal with it. If the original verdict was made by two Judges, and if one of them does not continue to be attached to the Court, the other Judge who continues to be attached to the Court alone shall deal with the review petition. It cannot be dealt with by any other Judge or Judges or by the same Judge sitting along with any other Judge who was not a party to the original verdict.