IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2008 / 13TH SRAVANA 1930 RCRev..No. 186 of 2008() ------------------------ RCA.102/2006 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT, THRISSUR RCP.13/2004 of MUNSIFF COURT,CHAVAKKAD .................... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT --------------------------------------------------------- SHAMSUDHEEN, THEKKAYIL HOUSE, BABU LODGE, GURUVAYOOR (KAVITHA STORES), THAIKKAD DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN SRI.P.V.BALAKRISHNAN SRI.T.K.SHAJAHAN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS ------------------------------------ 1. VELAYUDHAN, S/O.VALLASSERYSANKARANKUTTY GURUVAYOOR DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK. 2. RAVUNNI, S/O.VALLASSERY SANKARAN KUTTY, GURUVAYOOR DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK. BY THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: I.A.NO.1727/08 DISMISSED. 4/8/2008 SD/- P.R. RAMAN, JUDGE. SD/- T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. // TRUE COPY // P.S. TO JUDGE P.R.Raman & T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.C.R. No. 186 of 2008 - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 4th day of August, 2008. O R D E R Raman, J. This revision is against an order passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority confirming the order of the Rent Control Authority in allowing an amendment. The revision petitioner is the tenant. Eviction was sought for urging ground under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') originally and during the pendency of the proceedings, the landlord sought for an amendment by seeking to include a ground under Section 11(8) of the Act also. Challenging the said order the revision petitioner filed an appeal which was dismissed. Aggrieved thereby, this revision is filed. 2. We have gone through the order. It is only an amendment allowed by the court below giving opportunity to raise all the contentions available to the petitioner under law in his additional counter affidavit. The question as to whether the amendment ought to be allowed or not, is still available to be raised after final order is passed in the Rent Control proceedings. By interdicting the proceedings at this stage will only cause further delay. The RCR 186/2008 -2- question as to whether Sections 11(3) and 11(8) of the Act can simultaneously be urged and whether the landlord is entitled to seek an amendment as sought for and allowed by the court below, are therefore contentions which can be taken up even after the final order passed by the authority and if it goes against the petitioner. Without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to raise such contention in the appeal or revision, as the case may be, against the final order including the challenge against the present order impugned in this revision, we dismiss this revision petition. ( P.R.Raman, Judge.) (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/