IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 31ST MAY 2010 / 10TH JYAISTHA 1932 RCRev..No. 78 of 2006() ----------------------- RCA.192/2003 O F RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM RCP.29/2003 OF RENT CONTROL COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/PETITIONER --------------------------------------- PAUL KATTOOKKAREN, S/O.JOHN KATTOOKKARAN, KATTOOKKARAN HOUSE, 46/1221 A, JANAKEEYA ROAD, VADUTHALA, CHERANALLOOR VILLAGE, KOCHI-682 023. BY ADV. SRI.M.M.ALIAS SRI.PETER ISAAC RESPONDENT(S): APPELLANT/RESPONDENT ------------------------ JOY.M.ABRAHAM, S/O.ABRAHAM, AGED 48 YEARS, "BEATS", 38/462, KATTOOKKARAN BUILDING, S.A.ROAD, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, KOCHI-682 016, PRESENT ADDRESS:BEATS,37/1911,EMMANUEL LANE,KADAV- ANTHRA,KALOOR ROAD,KOCHI-682 017. THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- RCR. No. 78 of 2006 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of May, 2010 O R D E R Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The revision petition is remaining in the defect list on the reason that appropriate process for serving notice on the respondent has not been remitted. It was submitted on behalf of the revision petitioner that process is paid on 27-5- 2010. But the registry has reported to us that copy of the RCR is not received. The process continues to be defective. We have gone through the impugned judgment as well as the memorandum of revision. We find that the judgment impugned is the judgment of the Appellate Authority declining eviction on the ground of arrears of rent. We also see from the statement of facts that subsequent to the impugned judgment the building in question was surrendered by the respondent to the revision petitioner. That being so, examining the legality of the judgment of the RCR. No. 78 of 2006 -2- Appellate Authority declining eviction order under Section 11 (2)(b) will be an unnecessary exercise. The question whether the finding of the Appellate Authority regarding the arrears of rent was correct or not may arise in a suit which the revision petitioner may file against the respondent for recovery of arrears of rent. We dispose of the RCR as unnecessary, making it clear that the civil court which comes to consider any suit for arrears of rent which may be filed by the revision petitioner will not be unduly influenced by the finding in the impugned judgment regarding the arrears of rent currently due. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) (C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE) ksv/-