IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2011 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 OP (RC).No. 4243 of 2011(O) --------------------------- RCP.24/2010 of PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF,ALAPPUZHA .................... PETITIONER ------------------------ RAJA RAHIM,S/O.ABDUL RAHIM,AGED 46 YEARS VELIYIL HOUSE,THEKKANARYADU MURI,ARYADU SOUTH VILLAGE,ALAPPUZHA,REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER,P.J.NAVAS,S/O.P.A.JAFFAR, PUTHENVEEDU,A.N.PURAM WARD,ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO SMT.C.M.CHARISMA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. LAFILATHEEF,S/O.ABDUL LATHEEF,POORAYIL HOUSE,ERAVUKAD WARD,ALAPPUZHA WEST VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA-688001. 2. B.SHYAMALA,D/O.BHAVANI KUNJAMMA, SHYAMALA SADANAM,MULLACKAL VILLAGE,ALAPPUZHA, PIN-688001. 3. R.RAJAN,S/O.RAMAN NAIR,VYSHALI, ERUVAKAD WARD,ALAPPUZHA WEST VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA -688001. THIS OP (RENT CONTROL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.HARILAL, JJ. ------------------------ O.P.(RC) NO. 4243 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 21st day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The grievance of the petitioner, a tenant who is already evicted in execution of an ex parte order of eviction passed against him by the Rent Control Court Alappuzha in RCP No.24/2010 on the ground of cessation of occupation under Section 11 (4)(v), is that the learned Rent Control Court as well as the learned Execution Court passed the order of eviction/order of delivery without serving him with notice. It is submitted by the petitioner that his applications for getting the ex parte order of eviction set aside as well as for condoning the delay caused in the matter of filing the above application are pending before the Rent Control Court. It is also submitted that his applications (Exts.P6 and P7) for getting the order setting him ex parte before the Munsiff Court and for condoning the delay in filing that application are pending before the Execution Court. His grievance is that the Execution Court acted illegally in ordering OPRC No. 4243 /2011 2 delivery during the pendnecy of those applications. 2. In view of the admitted position that the petitioner has been evicted and the building has been delivered over to the landlords, we are not inclined to examine the merits of the grounds raised by the petitioner against the order of delivery. We dispose of this original petition observing that if the petitioner is successful in getting the ex parte order of eviction set aside by the Rent Control Court, it will be open to the petitioner to apply for restitution/re-delivery invoking Section 144 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the inherent powers of Judicial Tribunals. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE K.HARILAL, JUDGE. dpk OPRC No. 4243 /2011 3