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 7TH JUNE 2011 / 17TH JYAISHTA 1933 OP (RC).No. 1799 of 2011(O) --------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA.2761/2010 IN RCP.12/2010 of ADDL.MUNSIFF COURT, KANNUR .................... PETITIONER ----------------------- T.B.C.MOHAMOOD HAJI, S/O. MOIDEEN HAJI, AGED 61 YEARS, CAPITAL WOOD INDUSTRIES, PORT ROAD, AZHIKODE, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE SRI.K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- T. SHAMSUDEEN, S/O. ABDULLA, AGED 42 YEARS, 'SHAM', ADOOR, P.O.KADACHIRA, KANNUR, REP. BY P/A. HOLDER THUNDIYIL YUNUS, S/O.ABDULLA, AGED 58,RESIDING AT THUNDIYIL HOUSE, CHEMBILODE AMSOM, THANNADA DESOM,P.O.CHALA EAST, (VIA) KADACHIRA, KANNUR-670621. THIS OP (RENT CONTROL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------ O.P.(RC).No. 1799 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 7th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Under challenge in this original petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution is Ext.P6 order passed by the Rent Control Court in favour of the respondent/landlord. Under Ext.P6 order, the Rent Control Court has ordered joint trial of four rent control petitions filed by the respondent against the petitioner, who is the tenant in respect of four rooms in a large building. The grounds of eviction invoked are the grounds under Section 11 (3) and Section 11(4)(iii) of the Act. The learned Rent Control Court has allowed application for joint trial (I.A.No.2761/2010) noticing that no counter was filed and taking the view that the application is only to be allowed since all the rent control petitions are with regard to different units of the same building and the tenancy is under one and the same landlord. 2. Mr.A.Mohamed Mustaque learned counsel for the revision petitioner would assail Ext.P6 on the various grounds raised in this original petition. According to Mr.Mustaque, since O.P.(RC).No.1799/2011 2 the ground under Section 11(4)(ii) is invoked in all the rent control petitions, if joint trial of the petitions are allowed, the prejudice will be occasioned to the tenant who may not be able to effectively cross examine the landlord with respect to the contentions in respect of the four buildings which are subject matter of the four rent control petitions. We are not impressed by the above submission of Mr.Mohamed Mustaque. We feel that ordering joint trial will be of a convenience to the court and to the parties who are the same in all the four rent control petitions. We decline the jurisdiction and dispose of the original petition directing the Rent Control Court to ensure that while conducting trial no prejudice is caused to either party. The tenant petitioner should be allowed to adduce whatever evidence he wants to for substantiating the contention that he has raised in the four rent control petitions. Relevant evidence should not be shut off. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE dpk