IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 14TH JULY 2011 / 23RD ASHADHA 1933 OP(C).No. 2253 of 2011(O) ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA.1236/2011 IN OS.862/2010 of III ADDLMUNSIFF'S COURT,ERNAKULAM (RENT CONTROL) .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- MR.ALEX CYRIAC ,AGED 54 YEARS, S/O.N.S.CYRIAC,29/152 M,TOC-H ROAD, LANE NO.8,VYTTILA,COCHIN 682 019. BY ADVS. SRI.JOLLY JOHN, SMT.S.SIBHA. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. M/S.CUSTOMER LINE PRIVATE LIMITED,DOOR NO.38/UA/567 V3,CHOICE TOWERS,SAHODARAN AYYAPPAN ROAD,PANAMPILLY NAGAR,KOCHI 680 036,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR RAJESH VENUGOPAL. 2. MR.RAJESH VENUGOPAL,AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.VENUGOPAL,M/S.CUSTOMER LINE PRIVATE LIMITED, NO.38/UA/567 V3,CHOICE TOWERS,SAHODARAN AYYAPPAN ROAD,PANAMPILLY NAGAR,KOCHI 680 036. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss OP(C) NO.2253/2011 O APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.862/2010 DTD. 31/08/2010. P2: COPY OF THE PETITION OF I.A.NO.5486/2010 IN O.S.862/2010 DTD.31/08/2010. P3: COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT IN I.A.NO.5486/2010 IN O.S.862/2010 DTD. 15/09/2010. P4: COPY OF RCP 81/2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 07/05/2011. P5: COPY OF THE PETITION OF I.A.NO.1236/2011 IN OS.862/2010 DTD.08/02/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- O.P(C).No.2253 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 14th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT Petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No.862 of 2010 of the Court of learned Munsiff, Ernakulam and petitioner in I.A.No.1236 of 2011 (Ext.P5). According to the petitioner, he let out the room in question to the respondent in the year 2003 but, rent is in arrears from March 2005 onwards. When he demanded payment of rent, respondent filed O.S.No.862 of 2010 seeking decree for prohibitory injunction against forcible eviction. There, respondent contended that it has been regularly paying the rent which according to the petitioner is a false statement and hence action has to be taken against respondent for giving false statement. Thereon, petitioner filed Ext.P5, I.A.No.1236 of 2011 to take action against respondent under Secs.340(1) and 195(1) (b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Grievance of petitioner is that the said application is pending disposal. Hence petitioner prays for a direction for early disposal of Ext.P5. Learned counsel submitted that statement of the respondent that it has been regularly paying the rent is an utter nonsense. O.P(C).No.2253 of 2011 -: 2 :- 2. I need not go into the said controversy. If the application is still pending and steps on that application are complete, it is open to the petitioner to request the learned Munsiff, Ernakulam to dispose of the same as early as possible. This original petition is closed. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-