IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 5TH JANUARY 2010 / 15TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 180 of 2010(V) ------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 02/12/2009 IN IA 897/09 IN RCA.13/2009 of DISTRICT COURT, ALAPPUZHA RCP.21/2007 of PRL.MUNSIFF COURT, CHERTHALA (EP 358/08) .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.P.SHAJI, S/O.PARAMESWARAN, EZHUKULANGARA VEETTIL, WARD NO.11, CHARAMANGALAM MURI, MUHAMMA, CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.B.PRAMOD RESPONDENT(S): --------------- GEETHA, W/O.JAYAPRAKASH, SHAKTHIYIL VEETTIL, TC NO.11/345, KESTON ROAD, KAWADIYAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No. 180 OF 2010 ------------------------ Dated this the 5 th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Under challenge is Ext.P4 order of the Rent Control Appellate Authority condoning the delay caused in the matter of instituting the appeal against an order of eviction passed on the ground under clause (b) of sub section (2) of Section 11. The Appellate Authority actually allowed the application for condonation of delay imposing the condition that a sum of Rs.10,000/- should be paid by way of cost to the landlord. 2. Even though Sri.B.Pramod, learned counsel for the writ petitioner addressed us very strenuously, we are not persuaded to hold that the discretion, which the learned Appellate Authority had in the matter of condoning the delay, has been exercised wrongly while imposing the condition for payment of cost. After all, it is only on the ground of arrears of rent that the eviction order impugned in the appeal was passed. It is always open to the petitioner/tenant to have that order got vacated by making requisite deposit under clause (c) of Sub Section (2) of WPC.No.180/2010 2 Section 11. The only relief which the writ petitioner can aspire for is to have the delivery presently ordered on 6/1/2010 postponed to 15/1/2010. If the writ petitioner is desirous of having the appeal preferred by him considered on merits, he will have to abide by the condition imposed by the learned Appellate Authority by at least 14/1/2010. Accordingly, we dispose of the writ petition issuing the following directions only. i) The time for payment of cost imposed under Ext.P4 is extended till 14/1/2010. ii). The delivery presently ordered by the Execution Court is adjourned to 15/1/2010. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM , JUDGE dpk