Revision petition regarding eviction under Rent Control Act. Court granted petitioners ten months to vacate premises, conditional on undertaking, rent deposit, and payment. Execution proceedings stayed subject to compliance.
Ten months time granted to vacate; execution proceedings stayed; undertaking to vacate by 30.9.2013 required; deposit of arrears required.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS
FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012/23RD AGRAHAYANA 1934
RCRev..No. 390 of 2012 ()
RCA.63/2010 of I ADDL.DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM RCP.18/2008 of ADDL.MUNSIFF COURT,KOCHI
REVISION PETITIONER/PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS:
BY ADV. SRI.G.SUBRAMANIAN
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:
MRS.PHILLIS, AGED 73 YEARS W/O.TONY RHIVERO (LATE) RESIDING AT CC 18/81. THOPPUMPADY, KOCHI-682 005.
RR BY ADV. SRI.VARGHESE.J.PUNNACHALIL RR BY ADV. SRI.MICHAEL M WILSON
THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14-12-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
K.T.SANKARAN & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS JJ.,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.C.R. No.390 of 2012 E
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 14th day of December, 2012
O R D E R
K.T. Sankaran J.,
The respondent filed R.C.P. No.18 of 2008 on the file of the Rent Control Court, Kochi against the petitioners under Sections 11(3) and 11(4)(i) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act. The Rent Control Court allowed the R.C.P. under Section 11(3) of the Act. The prayer for eviction under Section 11 (4)(i) of the Act was rejected. The tenants filed R.C.A. No.63 of 2010 on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Ernakulam challenging the order of the Rent Control Court. The Appellate Authority dismissed the Rent Control Appeal by the judgment dated 24th February 2012. The tenants have filed this Revision Petition challenging the order and judgment of the Authorities below.
R.C.R. No.390 of 2012
:2:
28.11.2012, the following order was passed:
“Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the only request which the petitioners would make is to grant ten months' time to them to vacate the petition schedule building. Issue notice to the respondents by special messenger.
Post on 4.12.2012.
A copy of this order shall also be communicated to the respondent along with the notice.”
for the respondent submitted that the request made by the tenants for granting a reasonable time can be granted.
(i) The petitioners shall vacate the petition schedule building on or before 30.9.2013.
(ii) The petitioners shall file an un-conditional undertaking before the Rent Control Court undertaking to vacate the petition schedule building on or before 30.9.2013. The undertaking shall be
R.C.R. No.390 of 2012
:3:
filed within six weeks from today.
(iii) The petitioners shall deposit the arrears of rent, if any,
before the Executing Court within a period of two months.
(iv) The petitioners shall continue to pay the monthly rent on
or before 10th of every month until they vacate the petition schedule building.
(v) The Execution proceedings shall be kept in abeyance till 30.9.2013. However, if the petitioners fail to comply with any of the aforesaid conditions within the stipulated time, the E.P. shall be revived and the proceedings can be continued.
Sd/.
K.T. SANKARAN,
(JUDGE)
Sd/
M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, (JUDGE)
dl/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the eviction petitioners shall be granted ten months time to vacate the premises
Whether the execution proceedings shall be kept in abeyance during the time granted for vacating
1 provisions across 1 enactments
A.M. Kunhi Bava
A.M. Gafoor
Mrs. Phillis
K.T. Sankaran
M.L. Joseph Francis
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
