IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL THURSDAY, THE 8TH DECEMBER 2011 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 OP (RC).No. 4010 of 2011(O) -------------------------------- RCP.29/2002 of RENT CONTROL COURT (ADDL. MUNSIFF), TVM .................... PETITIONER -------------- S. SUNILKUMAR, S/O LATE P. SREEDHARAN, R/A T.C.35/309, PTP NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY ADV. SRI.AYYAPPAN SANKAR SRI.G.SURARSHAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. ABDUL REHMAN, S/O MOHAMMED HANEEFA, R/A T.C.9/2177, KANISON BUILDING, MADRASA LANE, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695256. 2. M. HASSAN, S/O MOHAMMED HANEEFA, R/A T.C.9/2177, KANISON BUILDING, MADRASA LANE, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 256. THIS OP (RENT CONTROL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/12/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP (RC).No. 4010 of 2011(O) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS EXT.P1:- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF RENT CONTROL PETITION IN RCP.29/02 FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS. EXT.P2:- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF STATEMENT OF OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE PETITIONERS IN RCP 29/02. EXT.P3:- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER DATED 31/05/03 OF THE HON. RENT CONTROL COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN RCP.29/02. EXT.P4:- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 30/05/07 OF THE HON. RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY IN RCA NOS.30/03, 6/04 AND 7/04. EXT.P5:- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER DT.13/10/10 OF THIS HON. HIGH COURT IN RCR.279/07. EXT.P6:- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF PLAINT IN O.S. NO.1743/09 FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS BEFORE THE HON. MUNSIFF'S COURT, TVM EXT.P7:- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 31/08/11 OF THE HON. II ADDL. MUNSIFF'S COURT, TVM IN O.S. NO.1743/09. EXT.P8:- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF PETITION, VIZ IA.1006/11 IN RCP.29/02 FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS FOR DIRECTION TO PAY DISPUTED ARREARS OF RENT AS CLAIMED BY THE RESPONDENTS. EXT.P9:- TRUE COPY OF ORDER DT.18/03/11 OF THE HON. RENT CONTROL COURT, TVM IN CMP NO.1006/11 IN RCP.29/02. EXT.P10:- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF PETITION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FILED ON 22/06/11 AS IA.4580/11. EXT.P11:- TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 25/06/11 OF THE HON. RENT CONTROL COURT, TVM IN RCP.29/02. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. HARILAL, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ O. P. (RC) No.4010 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose Under challenge in this Original Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution is Ext.P11 order passed by the Rent Control Court, Thiruvananthapuram. We notice that Ext.P11 order is a summary order of eviction passed by the Rent Control Court invoking its powers under Section 12(3). The remedy of the petitioner even if he has a genuine grievance about Ext.P11 is to prefer a regular appeal against Ext.P11 before the Appellate Authority. We relegate the petitioner to that remedy and dispose of this Writ Petition without interfering with Ext.P11. At the same time, considering the submission of Sri.Ayyappan Sankar, the learned counsel for the petitioner that the execution court O. P. (RC) No.4010 of 2011 -2- has already ordered delivery, we are inclined to grant the petitioner a short respite imposing proper conditions. We direct the execution court to keep in abeyance proceedings for delivery of the building for a period of two weeks from today i.e. till 20/12/11 subject to the following conditions:- 2. The petitioner shall pay a sum of ` 1 lakh towards the amounts claimed by the respondent either directly to the respondent or through the respondent's Advocate before the Rent Control Court on or before 16/12/11. This direction to pay the rent is not to be misunderstood as one permitting the petitioner to escape from the rigour of Ext.P11 by making payment of rent. We are sure that the Appellate Authority will be mindful of the legal position that unlike eviction orders passed under Section 11(2)(b), summary orders passed under Section 12(3) cannot be got vacated by making deposits. The Appellate Authority considering the O. P. (RC) No.4010 of 2011 -3- appeal to be preferred against Ext.P11 should be concerned with the legality and correctness of Ext.P11 in the context of the statutory procedure as envisaged by Section 12. Sd/- PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE Sd/- K. HARILAL JUDGE kns/- //True Copy// P. A. TO JUDGE