IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI FRIDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2009 / 3RD MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 34922 of 2008(G) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA 3298/08 IN RCP.19/2005 of MUNSIFF COURT,MUVATTUPUZHA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. SANTHA, W/O.LATE SASI, THOTTAPPILLIL HOUSE, AYAKKADU KARA, THRIKKARIYOOR VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM. 2. SARANYA, D/O.LATE SASI, THOTTAPPILLIL HOUSE, AYAKKADU KARA, THRIKKARIYOOR VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM) SRI.PRASANTH M.P RESPONDENT(S): --------------- BIJI A.KURUVILA, ANACHIRA HOUSE, KUROOR KARA, KOTHAMANGALAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------ W.P.(C)No. 34922 of 2008 & I.A.NO.1768/2008 IN R.C.R.170/2007 ------------------------ Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Under challenge in this writ petition under Article 227 is Ext.P3 order passed by the Rent Control Court, Muvattupuzha in I.A. No.3298/2008 in R.C.P. No.19/2005 which was an application under Section 11 (2)(c) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act for getting the order of eviction passed under Section 11(2) (b) vacated. The above I.A. was filed by the petitioners on the basis of certain observations made by this court in Ext.P1 order that if the petitioners deposit the entire arrears of rent as on the date of Ext.P1 less whatever amount is deposited during the pendency of the proceedings, it will be open to the petitioners to move application for getting the order of eviction vacated in terms of Section 11(2)(c). However, in Ext.P1 this court did not fix any time limit for making the application, which means that the writ petitioners could not have WPC.No.34922/2008 2 aspire for anything more than the statutory minimum period of 30 days from the date of the order. The petitioners made the deposit only on 3/10/2008, which is clearly beyond the period of 30 days from 22/8/2008. The Rent Control Court passed Ext.P3 dismissing the I.A filed by the petitioners finding that the deposit was after the expiry of the period of 30 days. A submission made by the petitioners that the Rent Control Court has the power to enlarge the time for deposit was not accepted by the court observing that there was no petition before that court seeking enlargement of time. Ext.P3 is impugned on the various grounds including the ground that the Rent Control Court could have suo motu enlarged the time for deposit. 2. Heard Sri.R.Bindu Sasthamangalam, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.K.P.Dandapani, senior counsel for the respondent. Sri.Bindu Sasthamangalam submits that the petitioners have already filed I.A. No.2768/2008 in R.C.R. No.170/2007. As requested by the learned counsel, we called for that I.A. and the same is being disposed of together with this writ petition. 3. This court under Ext.P1 has only confirmed the order of WPC.No.34922/2008 3 eviction passed under Section 11(2) (b). While, observing that the petitioners can always file an application under Section 11 (2) (c) for getting the eviction order set aside, this court significantly did not fix any time limit. This means that this court expected the petitioners to make the deposit within the statutory minimum period of 30 days. At the same time, this court did not foreclose the powers of the Rent Control Court for enlarging the time beyond 30 days on good grounds. The Rent Control Court cannot be blamed for having refused to exercise that power in the absence of any application. To that extent, we do not find any infirmity about Ext.P3 order challenged in this writ petition. At the same time, it is to be seen that Ext.P3 order cannot be said to be merely a procedural order, which does not affect the rights of the parties. According to us, Ext.P3 order is of consequence and can be challenged by the writ petitioners in a regular appeal under Section 18 before the appellate authority. The powers of the appellate authority as per section 18 are co- terminus with those of the Rent Control Court even in the matter of enlargement of time. Our disinclination to interfere with Ext.P3 will not stand in the way of the petitioners filing a regular WPC.No.34922/2008 4 appeal against Ext.P3 and seeking appropriate reliefs from the Rent Control Appellate authority. Appeal, if any, will be filed by the writ petitioners within two weeks from today. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE dpk