IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2011 / 19TH SRAVANA 1933 OP (RC).No. 2622 of 2011(O) --------------------------- RCP.91/2006 of ADDL.M.C.,KOZHIKODE-I .................... PETITIONER --------------------- 1. M.K.SHYLAJA, W/O.PURUSHOTHAMAN, RESIDING AT NEDUMBALAPRAMBIL,PUTHIYANGADI VILLAGE, EDAKKAD AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. 2. BYJU, S/O.PURUSHOTHAMAN, RESIDING AT NEDUMBALAPRAMBIL,PUTHIYANGADI VILLAGE, EDAKKAD AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. 3. DEEPA, D/O.PURUSHOTHAMAN, RESIDING AT NEDUMBALAPRAMBIL,PUTHIYANGADI VILLAGE, EDAKKAD AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.SURENDRAN SRI.P.M.PADMANABHAN SRI.P.A.HARISH SMT.RESMI NANDANAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- MALAKKAL JAYAPRAKASAN, S/O.CHATHUKUTTY, RESIDING AT MALAKKAL HOUSE, PUTHIYANGADI VILLAGE, EDAKKAD AMSOM DESOM, P.O.EDAKKAD, KOZHIKODE-673 305. THIS OP (RENT CONTROL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ O.P(RC).No. 2622 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 10th day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The petitioners are tenants against whom eviction order under Section 11(2)(b) was passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority. They filed petition under Section 11(2)(c) for getting that eviction order vacated. Since that petition was not filed on time, they filed application for condonation of delay. Noticing some deficiency in deposit, they filed a separate petition seeking permission to make up for the deficiency. The Rent Control Court by order dated 3/8/2011 dismissed all these applications. According to the petitioners, they filed copy applications readily. Copy applications have been numbered as C.A. Nos.1244/2011, 1245/2011 and 1246/2011 respectively. According to the petitioners, even as their copy applications are O.P.(RC).No.2622/2011 2 pending, the Execution Court has ordered delivery. They urge that if the copy applications are not complied with and copies issued the appeal which they intend to prefer against the order passed by the Rent Control Court, will be rendered infructuous. 2. Having considered the averments in the original petition and the submissions of Sri. P.A.Harish and in the nature of the limited reliefs that we are giving to the petitioners, we are of the view that it is not necessary to issue notice to the respondent. We are inclined to dispose of this original petition itself issuing the following directions; i). If C.A. Nos.1244/11,1245/11 and 1246/11 filed by the petitioners for obtaining copies of the orders passed were petitions filed by them in RCP No.91/2006 and petition under Section 11 (2)(c) are in order, the Additional Rent Control Court I, Kozhikode or any other court, which is concerned with the granting and compliance of the copy applications, will ensure that copies of the order are supplied by them to the petitioners early and at any rate within seven days of receiving a copy of this judgment. ii). In view of the above direction, there will be a further O.P.(RC).No.2622/2011 3 direction that the Execution Court i.e. Munsiff Court, Kozhikode which is executing the order in RCP No.91/2006 will not order or effect delivery of the building in question till 3/9/2011. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE dpk