IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 12TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 23RD MAGHA 1929 RCRev..No. 39 of 2008() ----------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 13/12/2007 IN IA.2865/06 IN RCA.39/2005 of DISTRICT COURT, THRISSUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/APPELLANT ------------------------------------------------------ SUBRAMANIAN, S/O. AIKARATH KOZHISSERY GOVINDAN, AIKARATH HOUSE, THRITHALLUR, VADANAPPILLY, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT SRI.RANJIT BABU RESPONDENT: PETITIONER/RESPONDENT ---------------------------------- SREESAILAM AUDITORIUM CUM SHOPPING COMPLEX CHARITABLE SOCIETY, THRITHALLUR, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT, BHASKARAN NAIR. THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.Balakrishnan Nair & P.N.Ravindran, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.C.R.No. 39 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 12th day of February, 2008 O R D E R Balakrishnan Nair, J. Tenant is the revision petitioner. The order impugned is one passed under section 12(1) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act directing the revision petitioner to deposit before the court or pay directly to the landlord the entire arrears of rent for the period from 1-5-2001 at the rate of Rs.1,200/- per month on or before 14-1- 2008. This order is attacked on the ground that the arrears of rent which can be deposited are only the arrears up to the date of notice. In support of that submission the learned counsel for the revision petitioner relied on a decision of the Apex Court in Chinnamma V. Gopalan (1995(2) KLT 755). Special reference is made to observations in that judgment at paragraph 7. 2. To consider this contention it is fruitful to refer to section 12 (1), which reads as follows:- “No tenant against whom an application for eviction has been made by the landlord under section 11, shall be RCR 39/08 2 entitled to contest the application before the Rent Control Court under that section, or to prefer an appeal under section 18 against any order made by the Rent Control Court on the application unless he has paid or pays to the landlord, or deposits with the Rent control Court or the appellate authority, as the case may be, all arrears of rent admitted by the tenant to be due in respect of the building up to the date of payment or deposit, and continues to pay or to deposit any rent which may subsequently become due in respect of the building, until the termination of the proceedings before the Rent Control Court or the appellate authority, as the case may be.” (emphasis supplied) A reading of the above section would show that the tenant is not only bound to deposit the arrears of rent but also the rent due from time to time till the appeal is finally disposed of. The subject matter of the decision cited before us was concerning the amount to be deposited for vacating an order of eviction passed under section 11(2)(b). In other RCR 39/08 3 wards, the interpretation of section 11(2)(c) was the subject matter of the decision. We are not inclined to accept the submissions of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner that certain observations therein would support his case. We notice that his case is directly against the plain words of the section. In the result, the revision fails and it is dismissed. K. Balakrishnan Nair, Judge. P.N. Ravindran, Judge. mn.