IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 21ST OCTOBER 2011 / 29TH ASWINA 1933 RCRev..No. 210 of 2011(E) ------------------------------ RCA.64/2009 of VI ADDL. DISTRICT COURT & RCAA, ERNAKULAM RCP.104/2007 of III ADDL.M.C. & RCC, EKM .................... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT-TENANT --------------------------------------- ------------------------- BABU THOMAS, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O. K.P.THOMAS, KOLUTHAL HOUSE, MULANTHURUTHY DESOM, MULANTHURUTHY VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.K.PAUL KURIAKOSE RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER-LANDLORD ----------------------------------------------- VARGHESE GEORGE.K., AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. GEORGE VARGHESE, KATTUMANGATTU HOUSE, MULANTHURUTHY DESOM, MULANTHURUTHY VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK. PIN-682314. ADV. GEORGE ABRAHAM FOR R SRI.ABRAHAM P.GEORGE FOR R1 SMT.M.SANTHY FOR R1 THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ R. C. R. No.210 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 21st day of October, 2011 ORDER Pius C. Kuriakose, J Under challenge in this revision filed by the tenant is the judgment of the Appellate Authority confirming the summary order of eviction passed by the Rent Control Court under Section 12(3) of Act 2 of 1965. Even though various grounds have been raised assailing the judgment of the Appellate Authority and the order of the Rent Control Court and Sri.Gopikrishnan Nambiar, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner addressed submissions before us based on all those grounds having gone through the judgment of the Appellate Authority and the order of the Rent Control Court and having kept in mind the law pertaining to passage of summary orders under Section 12(3) and the limitations of our jurisdiction under Section 20 we are convinced that no warrant is made for invocation of the revisional jurisdiction R. C. R. No.210 of 2011 -2- for correcting the impugned judgment of the Appellate Authority. 2. However, the submission of Sri.Nambiar that the merits of the various grounds raised in the RCP which includes those under Sections 11(3) and 11(8) of Act 2 of 1965 also have not been adjudicated and the further submission that the revision petitioner will be prepared to pay the entire arrears due as on today as alleged by the landlord with interest and costs has some appeal to us. The learned counsel for the landlord/ respondent submitted that it should also be ensured that the Rent Control Court adjudicates the issues involved in the RCP and passes orders on the merits of the grounds without delay. It was pointed out that the RCP is of the year 2007. 3. Having considered the submissions addressed at the Bar, we are of the view that notwithstanding our finding that there is no illegality or irregularity or impropriety about the judgment of the Appellate Authority impugned in this revision, the RCR can be disposed of issuing the following R. C. R. No.210 of 2011 -3- directions:- 4. The judgment of the Appellate Authority impugned in this revision as well as the order of the Rent Control Court under Section 12(3) will stand set aside and RCP No.104/07 will go back to the Rent Control Court, Ernakulam provided the following conditions are satisfied:- 1) The petitioner pays to the respondent a sum of ` 45,000/- so as to cover the arrears of rent which has fallen due in respect of the building in question together with interest at the statutory rate within a period of seven days from today either directly or through the respondent's counsel in this Court or in the court below. 2) The petitioner pays a sum of ` 5,000/- to the respondent as cost either directly or through the respondent's counsel in this Court within the same time limit of seven days. If payments as ordered above are made on time this order remanding the RCP to the Rent Control Court will become operative. If payment is not made on time the R. C. R. No.210 of 2011 -4- impugned judgment of the Appellate Authority will stand confirmed. If the present order of remand becomes operative the Rent Control Court will expedite matters in the RCP, ensure that all pretrial steps are completed at the earliest and will ensure that the Rent Control Petition is disposed of within a maximum period of 3 months from today. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE C. K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE kns/-