IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 29TH MAGHA 1932 RCRev..No. 64 of 2011() ----------------------- RCA.102/2007 of RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, KOZHIKODE RCP.171/2006 of ADDL.M.C.,KOZHIKODE-I .................... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS -------------------------------------------------------------- 1. T.K.KUTTIMALU, AGED 78 YEARS, W/O.GOPALAN VAIDYAR, RESIDING AT THIYYAKANDIYIL, NEDIYANAD AMSOM AND DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. K.P.SREEMATHI, AGED 58 YEARS, D/O.LATE GOPALAN VAIDYAR, RESIDING AT KARUVAMPOYIL, NEDIYANAD AMSOM AND DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 3. PATHICHIKKUNNUMMAL P.K.SOUMINI, AGED 53 YEARS, D/O.LATE GOPALAN VAIDYAR, RESIDING AT KODUWATH AMSOM AND AVILORA DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 4. KOLOTH T.K.REMA,AGED 46 YEARS, D/O.LATE GOPALAN VAIDYAR, RESIDING AT KODUWATH AMSOM AND AVILORA DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 5. T.K.RAMAN, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.LATE GOPALAN VAIDYAR, RESIDING AT THIYYAKKANDIYIL, NEDIYANAD AMSOM AND DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 6. T.K.KUMARAN, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.LATE GOPALAN VAIDYAR, RESIDING AT THIYYAKKANDIYIL, NEDIYANAD AMSOM AND DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.R.KESAVA KAIMAL SRI.N.M.MADHU RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS -------------------------------------- 1. SIVADASAN, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.LATE VELAYUDHAN, PULLANKADDI HOUSE, RESIDING AT NARIKKUNI, NARIKKUNI AMSOM AND DESOM, NARIKKUNI POST, KOZHIKODE TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 585. 2. P.K.YESODA, AGED 64 YEARS, W/O.LATE VELAYUDHAN, PULLANKANDIYIL HOUSE, NEDIYANAD AMSOM AND DESOM, NARIKKUNI, KOZHIKODE TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673585. 3. P.K.SATHYACHANDRAN, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.LATE VELAYUDHAN, PULLANKANDIYIL HOUSE, NEDIYANAD AMSOM AND DESOM, NARIKKUNI, KOZHIKODE TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 585. 4. T.K.GANESSAN, S/O.LATE K.K.GOPALAN VAIDYAR, NOW EMPLOYED AND TEMPORARILY RESIDING AT ALDUNI RESTAURANT, ALWADIA, SHARJAH IN U.A.E., POST BOX NO.5346. THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------ R.C.R.No. 64 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 18th day of February, 2011 O R D E R Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Under challenge in this revision filed by the legal heirs of the deceased tenant is the judgment of the Rent Control Appellate Authority confirming the order of eviction passed by the Rent Control Court under Section 11 (2)(b) and Section 11 (3) of the Act. It is submitted at the very outset by Sri.V.R.K.Kaimal that the petitioners are not challenging the order passed under Section 11(3) since they have already surrendered the building to the landlords. 2. The grievance of the petitioners is regarding the eviction order passed under Section 11(2)(b) i.e. ground under arrears of rent. According to Mr.Kaimal, the correct agreed rent was only Rs.250/- per mensem and not Rs.3,000/- per mensem as concurrently found. The learned counsel submitted that a total amount of Rs.1 Lakh has been deposited by the petitioners RCR.No.64/2011 2 before the Rent Control Appellate Authority in compliance with the condition imposed by that authority for granting stay. According to Mr.Kaimal, unless this revision petition is admitted and stay is granted, the landlords are likely to withdraw the amount. 3. We have considered the submissions of Mr.Kaimal. Admittedly, the building in question is surrendered to the landlords. Any proceedings for eviction, according to us, cannot continue once the building in question is surrendered or delivered over. In that way, the eviction proceedings have become infructuous. 4. As for the grievance of the petitioners regarding the correct agreed rent whether it is Rs.250/- as contended by the tenant or Rs.3,000/- as alleged by the landlords, we feel that the petitioners may have to approach the regular civil suit for a declaration regarding the correct contract rent. We permit the revision petitioners to move the competent civil court by appropriate suit and grant to the revision petitioners six weeks time from today for filing the suit. If suit is filed by the petitioners within six weeks from today, the said suit will be RCR.No.64/2011 3 within the period of limitation as there is justification for invoking Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act for the purpose of limitation. In view of the permission granted by us to the revision petitioners for moving the civil court, we direct the court, which is presently in seizin of the cheque application submitted by the landlords(Rent Control Appellate Authority), not to pass orders on the above application for a period of three months from today. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE dpk