IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2011 / 31ST JYAISHTA 1933 RCRev..No. 33 of 2011(A) ----------------------------- I.A.2454/09 IN RCA.22/07 OF I ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, KOLLAM RCP.57/05 OF PRL. RCC., KOLLAM. --------------------- REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------------------- DHANALEKSHMI, W/O.RAMACHANDRAN REDDIAR, DHANAM HOUSE, CUTCHERRY WARD, KOLLAM NOW RESIDING AT 26/447, CURSON ROAD, EACHAKKALPURAYIDOM, NEAR RSP OFFICE, CUTCHERRY WARD, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/PETITIONER -------------------------------------------------- D.REMANI AMMA, SREE RAGAM, JAWAHAR NAGAR THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695141. ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & N. K. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ R. C. R. No.33 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 21st day of June, 2011 ORDER Pius C. Kuriakose, J Under challenge in this revision is the order of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Kollam allowing I.A.2454/09, an application filed by the petitioner for restoration of an appeal preferred by the revision petitioner imposing a condition that 50% of the arrears of rent alleged in the Rent Control Petition should be remitted and a further condition that ` 500/- should be paid by way of cost. In the present revision, the petitioner's grievance is regarding the condition for remittance of the arrears of rent. According to Sri.Krishna Mani, the affidavit in support of the restoration application was sworn to by the petitioner's counsel a lady Advocate of Kollam Bar and the court below was not justified R. C. R. No.33 of 2011 -2- in imposing this harsh a condition, the above affidavit notwithstanding. According to Sri.Krishna Mani, this is a case where landlord-tenant relationship was very stoutly denied by the tenant and the Appellate Authority was not at all justified in insisting that such a tenant should pay 50% of the arrears alleged by the landlord even to have an adjudication of a statutory appeal preferred under Section 18. 2. The submissions of Sri.Mani were opposed by Sri.G.Sreekumar, the learned counsel for the respondent. Sri.Sreekumar drew our attention to the statement of objections filed by the revision petitioner to the Rent Control Petition and submitted that there is no serious denial of the landlord-tenant relationship. He submitted that the condition imposed by the Appellate Authority cannot be said to be harsh. The Appellate Authority has only directed remittance of 50% of the rent in arrears. R. C. R. No.33 of 2011 -3- 3. Having considered the submissions addressed at the Bar, we are of the view that the conditions imposed by the learned Appellate Authority can be modified to a certain extent. Hence, in modification of the conditions imposed by the learned Appellate Authority in the impugned order, we dispose of this RCR by ordering that I.A. No.2454/09 in RCA.22/07 will stand allowed subject to the following conditions:- 1) The revision petitioner pays a sum of ` 1 lakh to the respondent either directly or through the respondent's counsel before the court below (inclusive of the sum of ` 25,000/- already deposited by the revision petitioner pursuant to interim order passed by this Court on 24/05/11) on or before 15/07/11. 2) The petitioner pays a sum of ` 1,500/- to the respondent inclusive of the sum of ` 500/- stated to be already paid as cost. The balance amount of ` 1,000/- R. C. R. No.33 of 2011 -4- payable as cost can be paid either directly to the respondent or through the respondent's counsel in this Court within a period of three weeks from today. We make it clear that in case the above conditions are not complied with, I.A. No.2454/09 will stand dismissed. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE N. K. BALAKRISHNAN JUDGE kns/- The balance amount of ` 1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) payable as cost has been paid in time to the counsel for the respondent, as directed in the order dated 21/06/11 in R.C.R.33/11, vide memo dated 13/07/11 filed by the counsel for the petitioner bearing C.F. number 2704/11. Sd/- Registrar (Judicial)