IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2011 / 15TH ASHADHA 1933 RCRev..No. 141 of 2011(B) ------------------------------ RCA.10/2006 of RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THRISSUR RCP.13/2003 of RENT CONTROL COURT,WADAKANCHERRY .................... REVISION PETITIONER/LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE DECEASED APPELLANT --------------------------------------------------------------------------- C.P.HARIDAS,S/O.PRABHAKARAN, MULLOORKKARA VILLAGE,MULLOORKKARA DESOM, THALAPPILLY TALUK,MULLOORKKARA PO,THRISSUR 680 583 BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMACHANDRAN SRI.M.R.NANDAKUMAR SRI.P.SETHUMADHAVAN SRI.G.PREM SAGAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/PETITIONER -------------------------------------------------- SASIKUMAR,S/O.UNNIYADAN LAKSHMIKUTTY AMMA,CHELAKKARA VILLAGE,CHELAKKARA DESOM, THALAPILLY TALUK, CHELAKKARA PO,THRISSUR 680 586. ADV. SRI.RAJIT FOR R1 THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & P. BHAVADASAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ R. C. R. No.141 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 6th day of July, 2011 ORDER Pius C. Kuriakose, J Having considered the submissions addressed at the Bar by Sri.K.Ramachandran, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri.Rajit, the learned counsel for the respondent/landlord, we feel that in order that the crux issue between the parties (whether eviction ground is established) is decided on merits, it is necessary that the learned Appellate Authority should be directed to consider the Rent Control Appeal on merits. Applications for impleadment of the legal heirs of the deceased tenant I.A.20714/10 and I.A.2713/10 for consequential amendment in the appeal memorandum were obviously filed. It appears that there was some delay in filing the impleadment application. The learned Appellate Authority took the view that it was necessary for the petitioner to file a petition for setting aside R. C. R. No.141 of 2011 -2- the abatement also and in that view of the matter dismissed I.A.2713/10 and I.A.2714/10. The appeal itself was dismissed as abated by passing the impugned judgment. Sri.K.Ramachandran submitted that the revision petitioner and the other legal representatives of the deceased tenant will be filing an application before the learned Appellate Authority within three weeks from today seeking condonation of the delay caused in the matter of filing the application for impleadment. Under the above circumstances, we dispose of the RCR issuing the following orders:- The judgment under appeal is set aside and RCA.10/06 is remitted back to the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Thrissur. If application seeking condonation of the delay caused in the matter of filing I.A.2714/10 is filed by the revision petitioner within three weeks from today, the learned Appellate Authority will favourably consider that application and the other two applications. Once applications are favourably considered and the legal R. C. R. No.141 of 2011 -3- representative of the deceased appellant/tenant is brought on record as additional appellant in the RCA, the learned Appellate Authority will hear both sides on merits of the RCA and dispose of the RCA in accordance with law without undue delay. As connected matters have been already finalised by this Court, the learned Appellate Authority will ensure that the RCA is disposed of finally at any rate within one month of the impleadment being carried out. The parties will enter appearance on 22/07/11. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE P. BHAVADASAN JUDGE kns/-