IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2009 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 34748 of 2009(K) -------------------------- EP. 239/09 IN RCP.31/2008 of PRL.MUNSIFF COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- YOHANNAN VINCENT @ JOHN, S/O.VINCENT, RESIDING AT TC 13/1941, KULLUVETTAMKUZHI VEEDU, KANNAMMOOLA, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-14. BY ADV. SRI.A.B.MOHANAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DR.RADHIKA RAMACHANDRAN, W/O. RAMACHANDRAN, `VIBANCHIKA', TC 15/167, ALTHARA NAGAR, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. NEERAJ KISHORE, S/O.RAMACHANDRAN, DO. DO. 3. NISHANT VINAYAK, S/O.RAMACHANDRAN, DO. DO. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------ W.P.C.No. 34748 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The tenant, who is facing proceedings for execution of order of eviction passed on the ground of arrears of rent by the Rent Control Court, Thiruvananthapuram, is the petitioner in this writ petition under Article 227. According to Sri.A.B.Mohankumar, learned counsel for the writ petitioner, the petitioner does not dispute that the rent as alleged and as found by the Rent Control Court is in arrears. Due to financial constraints, the petitioner is not in a position to discharge the arrears immediately. The petitioner filed an interlocutory application before the Rent Control Court seeking enlargement of time for depositing or paying the arrears of rent found by the court under its eviction order passed under Section 11 (2) (b). The learned counsel submits that yesterday (2/12/2009), the above application was dismissed by the Rent Control Court. According to the learned counsel, the respondents/landlords are very keen on evicting the WPC.No.34748/2009 2 petitioner and as requested by them, the Execution Court has already passed order of delivery considering E.P. No.239/2009. The petitioner seeks intervention of this court lest he should be evicted on 11/12/2009. According to the learned counsel, breathing time may be given, so that the petitioner is able to challenge the order passed by the Rent Control Court dismissing the application for enlargement of time. 2. Having considered the averments in the writ petition and the submissions of Sri.A.B.MohanKumar, we feel that some time can be given to the petitioner imposing reasonable conditions. The arrears of rent due from the petitioner, as presently found by the Rent Control Court, as on today will come to more than Rs.1,40,000/-. Having regard to the limited nature of the relief which is being given to the petitioner, we are of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of at this stage itself issuing the following directions and imposing the following conditions. i). The petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only) to the respondents either directly or through WPC.No.34748/2009 3 their counsel before the Execution Court on or before 18/12/2009 and produce receipt before the Execution Court. ii). The Execution Court (the Principal Munsiff's Court, Thiruvananthapuram,) is directed to adjourn delivery presently ordered in E.P. No.239/2009 in RCP No.31/2008 to 19/12/2009. If, on 19/12/2009 when the EP is called in that court, it is revealed that the petitioner has paid the amount as ordered above, that court will adjourn the EP again to the day the court closes for Christmas vacation. If it is revealed that payment is not made, that court will ensure that delivery is effected immediately. In the meanwhile, it is open to the petitioner to pursue his WPC.No.34748/2009 4 remedies against the order of the learned Rent Control Court dismissing the application for enlargement of time. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE dpk