ORDER M. M. Sundresh, J. 1. These two review applications are filed to review the order of this Court, dated 26.3.2013, made in O.S.A.No. 257 and 258 of 2012 2. We do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by this Court, earlier, as it is a settled law that a review cannot be a re-hearing. 3. Learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the findings rendered by us in the appeals shall not affect the decision of the learned Single Judge. The observation, which, the learned senior counsel seeks before us now, has already been reiterated in our order passed in the appeals. However, at the risk of repetition, we once again make it clear that the learned Single Judge while either deciding the appeal or any other Interlocutory application, will have to decide the same on its own merit, without being influenced by any of the observation made by us in the appeals. We also make it clear that the observation made by us is only a prima facie observation both on facts and on law. This is inclusive of our observation on the maintainability of the suit and also on the applications as discussed in paragraph 6.3 of the order dated 26.3.2013, passed by us in the appeals in O.S.A.Nos.257 and 258 of 2012. 4. With the above said observations, these two review applications are dismissed. No costs.