IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2011 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1933 OP (RC).No. 1193 of 2011(O) --------------------------- RCA.26/2009 of ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, PARAVUR RCP.16/2008 of MUNSIFF COURT, PARAVUR (EP 332/09) .................... PETITIONER : -------------------- ABY JACOB, S/O.JACOB, KALLUVEETTIL HOUSE, KADAMAKKUDY VILLAGE KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.LIJO RESPONDENT(S): --------------- KOCHURANI, W/O.URUMEES, THALIYATH HOUSE, PUTHANPALLY MURI, VARAPPUZHA VILLAGE, PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683517. THIS OP (RENT CONTROL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------ O.P(RC).No. 1193 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 24th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The tenant, against whom an order of eviction was passed by the Rent Control Court and confirmed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority, is the petitioner in this original petition under Article 227. Sri.Lijo.P. learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Execution Court has already ordered delivery in E.P. No.332/2009 and unless this court grants relief, the petitioner stands the risk of being thrown out of the building. 2. We enquired of the learned counsel for the petitioner as to why the tenant did not pay or deposit the arrears of rent and got the eviction order vacated under Section 11(2)(c). The learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is ready to do so, but sought for two months time. We are not inclined to grant so much of time to the petitioner. At the same time, in order to enable the petitioner to pursue the legal remedies available to him under Section 11(2)(c),we are inclined to grant him a short time. We dispose of the original petition issuing the following OP(RC).No.1193/2011 2 directions; i). The petitioner is permitted to have recourse to the statutory remedy available to him under Section 11(2)(c) against the order of eviction which is being executed. We do not foreclose the remedy which may be available to the petitioner under Section 14 against the order of delivery which is stated to be passed. ii). Considering the above direction, we direct the learned Principal Munsiff, North Paravur to keep in abeyance proceedings for delivery till 4/4/2011 if delivery is not already effected. Issue copy today itself. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE dpk