IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 14TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 23RD BHADRA 1932 RCRev..No. 266 of 2010() ------------------------ RCA.12/2007 of RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHROITY ,KOTTAYAM RC(OP).13/2003 of RENT CONTROL COURT, KANJIRAPPALLY .................... REVN.PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS/COUNTER PETITIONER ----------------------------------- 1. I.N.T.U.C. MUNDAKKAYAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, M.J.KUNJACHAN. 2. THIRUKKOCHI THOTTAM THOZHILALI UNION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, K.K.JANARDANAN MUNDAKKAYAM, NO.280/70/(INTUC). 3. HEAD LOAD TIMBER GENERAL WORKERS UNION, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, C.A.THOMAS, MUNDAKKAYAM, NO.511/91(INTUC). BY ADV. SRI.RAJEEV V.KURUP SRI.ALEX.M.SCARIA RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS -------------------------------------- 1. V.S. MARIAM BEEVI, W/O.LATE MUSTHAFA RESIDING AT SHAMLLA, PALARIVATTAM P.O. 686513. 2. ALEYAMMA JOSEPH, W/O. LATE P.D. JOSEPH PUTHENPARAMBIL, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O. 686513 3. MARITTA JOSEPH, W/O.DINESH MURIKKAN, PUTHENPARAMBIL, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O.686513 4. MERRY JOSEPH, W/O.LATE JOSEPH SCARIA, PUTHENPARAMBIL, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O.686513 5. P.J.CHACKO, S/O.LATE P.D.JOSEPH, PUTHENPARAMBIL, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O.686513 6. P.J.DOMINIC, S/O.LATE P.D.JOSEPH, PUTHENPARAMBIL, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O.686513 ADV. SRI.K.A.HASSAN FOR CAVEATOR THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. ------------------------ R.C.R.No. 266 OF 2010 ------------------------ Dated this the 14th day of September, 2010 O R D E R Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The learned counsel for the revision petitioners would very fairly bring to our notice the judgment of this Court in R.C.R. No.225/2010 and connected cases. He submitted that those judgments are in respect of similar orders passed in respect of other portions of the larger building, a part of which only is the building which is subject matter of the present RCR. He agreed that in the teeth of those judgments, it will be difficult for the revision petitioners to successfully assail the impugned judgment. He only requested that the time be granted till 15/11/2010, so that the revision petitioners can continue in possession till the Panchayat elections are over. 2. We feel that the request of the learned counsel for the revision petitioners is reasonable. In view of the various reasons RCR.No.266/2010 2 stated by this Court in the common judgment in R.C.R. No.225/2010 & connected cases, we do not find any illegality, irregularity or impropriety, as envisaged by Section 20 of Act 2 of 1965, about the judgment of the Appellate Authority, which is impugned in this revision. 3. The RCR will stand dismissed. However, the Execution Court is directed not to order and effect delivery of the building in question till 15/11/2010 subject to the following conditions; The Secretary of the first revision petitioner representing the first revision petitioner and the other two revision petitioners will file an affidavit before the Execution Court within three weeks from today undertaking to give peaceful surrender of the building in question to the first respondent landlady on or before 15/11/2010 and undertaking further that arrears of rent if any found in respect of the building will be discharged within one month and also that occupational charges at the current rent rate will also be paid till such time as the building is surrendered. RCR.No.266/2010 3 We make it clear that the revision petitioners will get benefit of time granted as above, only if the affidavit as directed above is filed on time. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE dpk RCR.No.266/2010 4 RCR.No.266/2010 5 RCR.No.266/2010 6 PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE RCR.No.266/2010 7 dpk