IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 27TH OCTOBER 2009 / 5TH KARTHIKA 1931 RCRev..No. 301 of 2006() ----------------------------------- AGAINST THE COMMN ORDER DTD. 27.2.2005 IN IA.1942/2005 IN UN NUMBERED of RENT CONTROL APPEAL OF 2005 OF THE RENT CONTROL APPELLATE, AUTHORITY DISTRICT COURT), PALAKKAD. RCP.45/2003 of RENT CONTROLLER (PRL.MUNSIFF COURT), PALAKKAD. .................... PETITIONER(S) /APPELLANT:PETITIONER -------------------------- CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, PALAKKAD REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, AJITH RAJ, S/O. P.I. RAJU, AGED 38 YEARS, P.K. ITTIYERA & SONS, BIG BAZAR, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. MR.BINOY VASUDEVAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS ------------------------- C.S. RAMACHANDRAN, 27/204, CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BUILDINGS, MELAMURI, PALAKKAD-678 014. R1 BY ADVS.MR.V.CHITAMBARESH, MR.T.C.SURESH MENON. THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/10/2009, ALONG WITH RCR NO. 304 OF 2006 RCR NO. 325 OF 2006 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ R.C.R. NOS: 301, 304 & 325 OF 2006 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th October, 2009. O R D E R PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J. The landlord is the petitioner in all these revision petitions. The challenge is against the common order passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority declining to condone the delay of 245 days caused in the matter of instituting the Rent Control Appeals. 2. We have heard Adv. Mr. Manikantan, learned counsel for the revision petitioner, Adv. Mr. Suresh Menon and senior counsel Shri. S.V.Balakrishna Iyer for the tenant-respondents. 3. We are unable to agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner that the delay stood satisfactorily explained by the petitioners. However, as rightly submitted by the learned counsel even in cases the delay is not satisfactorily explained, the Appellate Court has the discretion to condone the delay on the consideration that causes should be adjudicated on merits rather than decided on technicalities. We would have been inclined on the facts of these cases to set aside the impugned orders and condone the delay and direct the appellate authority to consider the rent control appeals RCR Nos: 301,304 & 325/2006 2 on merits imposing stringent terms. But it is to notice that the apposite ground which may be available to the petitioner which is an institution is the ground under Sub Section 7 of Section 11 of the Rent Control Act, 1965, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'. It is not that ground invoked in the Rent Control Petitions. It was submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that there will not be serious objections, in this Court granting liberty to the petitioner to file fresh rent control petitions invoking the ground under Sub Section 7 of Section 11 of the Act and any other ground which is presently available to them. 4. Under the above circumstances, we permit the revision petitioner-landlord to withdraw from all the Rent Control Petitions with liberty to institute fresh Rent Control Petitions against the various tenants, invoking all grounds presently available including the ground under Sub Section 7 of Section 11 of the Act. The Rent Control Revisions are accordingly disposed of. 4. It is needless to mention that in view of the leave granted under this judgment, the prospective Rent Control Petitions to be filed by the revision petitioners will not be hit by the bar under Section 15 of Act 2 of the Act. 5. It is made clear that the instant judgment will become RCR Nos: 301,304 & 325/2006 3 operative only if the revision petitioner pays a consolidated amount of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) to the Kerala Mediation Centre and produce receipt before this Court. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj A consolidated amount of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) comprising of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) each in R.C.R.301/2006, 304/06 and 325/06 has been paid to the Kerala Mediation Centre vide memo Nos. c.f 4557/09, 4558/09 and 4559/09 dated 13/11/2009 respectively in R.C.Rs 301/2006, 304/06 and 325/06. Sd/- Registrar (Judicial) PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. --------------------------------------- L.A.A.NO: --------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Dated: