IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL MONDAY, THE 21ST NOVEMBER 2011 / 30TH KARTHIKA 1933 RCRev..No. 439 of 2011 --------------------------- RCA.110/2006 of I ADDL. RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THRISSUR RCP.82/2005 of RENT CONTROL COURT,THRISSUR .................... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------------------- CHANDRAN, S/O PARAVATH KOCHUMON, PARALAM VILLAGE, DESOM, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.DILIP J. AKKARA RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT/PETITIONER: -------------------------------------------------- PALU, S/O ARIMBOORU ADAMKULAM OUSEPH, KODANNUR VILLAGE, DESOM, THRISSUR - 680 574. THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. HARILAL, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ R. C. R. No.439 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 21st day of November, 2011 ORDER Pius C. Kuriakose, J The tenant challenges in this revision under Section 20 the judgment of the Rent Control Appellate Authority confirming the order of eviction passed against him under Section 11(2)(b). The grievance which was voiced before us by Sri.Dilip J. Akkara, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner was that the learned Appellate Authority has not clearly provided in its judgment that the order of eviction passed under Section 11(2)(b) can be got vacated by making requisite deposits and filing application under Section 11(2) (c). 2. It is trite that the right under Section 11(2)(c) to have eviction orders passed under Section 11(2)(b) vacated on the basis of deposits made within the statutory period or within the period granted by the Rent Control Court or the R. C. R. No.439 of 2011 -2- Appellate Authority as the case may be is a statutory right of the tenant. It is needless to state that the eviction order confirmed by the Appellate Authority under Section 11(2)(b) is subject to Section 11(2)(c). 3. Sri.Dilip J. Akkara submitted that I.A.7874/11 has already been filed by the revision petitioner before the Rent Control Court under Section 11(2)(c). We are sure that the learned Rent Control Court will decide the above I.A. in accordance with law. If the decision in the above I.A comes to be against the revision petitioner it is open to him to challenge the same through a regular appeal under Section 18 before the Rent Control Appellate Authority. Sd/- PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE Sd/- K. HARILAL JUDGE kns/- //True Copy// P. A. TO JUDGE R. C. R. No.439 of 2011 -3-