IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DECEMBER 2011 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA 1933 OP (RC).No. 4105 of 2011(O) --------------------------- RCP.14/2011 of MUNSIF COURT, KUTHUPARAMBA .................... PETITIONERS ------------------------------- 1. MARY JOSE, W/O.JOSE, AGED 58 YEARS, KIZHAKKAYIL HOUSE (SAMBATH) NEAR P R N SS COLLEGE, MATTAANUR, P.O.MATTANUR, THALASSERI TALUK. 2. BOBBY JOSE, S/O.JOSE,AGED 29 YEARS, KIZHAKKAYIL HOUSE (SAMBATH) NEAR P R N SS COLLEGE, MATTAANUR, P.O.MATTANUR, THALASSERI TALUK. 3. CIRIL JOSE, S/O.JOSE, KIZHAKKAYIL HOUSE,(SAMBATH),AGED 29 YEARS, NEAR P R N SS COLLEGE,MATTAANUR, P.O.MATTANUR, THALASSERI TALUK. 4. BRINJINA JOSE, D/O.JOSE, KIZHAKKAYIL HOUSE,(SAMBATH),AGED 30 YEARS, NEAR P R N SS COLLEGE,MATTAANUR, P.O.MATTANUR, THALASSERI TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.PAVITHRAN SRI.JAYANANDAN MADAYI PUTHIYAVEETTIL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- C.P.ABOOBAKKER HAJI, S/O.USMAN HAJI, PADUVILAYI AMSOM, VENGAD DESOM, THALASSERY TALUK,PIN 670643. THIS OP (RENT CONTROL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.HARILAL, JJ. ------------------------ O.P.(RC) NO. 4105 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 14th day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Under challenge in this original petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution is Ext.P5 order of the Rent Control Court . By Ext.P5 order, the Rent Control Court has allowed the application for amendment filed by the landlord. That application was allowed accepting the landlord's version that the amendment is necessary for correcting certain typographical errors which had crept into paragraph 3 of the Rent Control Petition. 2. Even though Sri.K.V.Pavithran learned counsel for the petitioners very fervently submitted before us that the impugned order will result in serious prejudice to the petitioners/tenants, we do not think that any case is made out for invocation of the visitorial jurisdiction of this court under Article 227. Visitorial jurisdiction under Article 227 is not invoked for correcting each and every wrong order passed by the Subordinate Judicial O.P.(RC) No. 4105 /2011 2 Authorities. Having gauged Ext.P5 by the para meters, which are applicable for exercising the visitorial jurisdiction, we are convinced that there is no warrant for invocation of the above jurisdiction which is to be invoked only in exceptional circumstances. We decline jurisdiction and dismiss this original petition in limine. However, we make it clear that if the final order to be passed by the learned Rent Control Court in R.C.P No. 14/2011 goes against the petitioners, and it becomes necessary for the petitioners to prefer appeal under Section 18, the petitioners will have the liberty of urging the grounds raised in this original petition as grounds in the prospective rent control appeal . We also make it clear that on the amended original petition, the petitioners should be permitted to file additional objections if any. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE K.HARILAL, JUDGE. dpk O.P.(RC) No. 4105 /2011 3