Partly allowed

Antony Gorden Mendez v. K.T.D.C. Hotels and Resorts Ltd.

Kerala HC3 Oct 2018FAO/75/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment disposes of four First Appeals filed by tenants challenging orders dismissing their applications under CPC Order 21 Rule 21 for rehearing appeals. The Court quashed the orders dismissing the rehearing applications and remitted the matters to the court below.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders under Order XLI Rule 21 CPC set aside and appellate judgments set aside. Matter remitted to the court below for fresh disposal.

Antony Gorden Mendez Vs K.T.D.C. Hotels and Resorts Ltd. — Landlord and Tenant | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD

¶4

WEDNESDAY,THE 03RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 11TH ASWINA, 1940

¶5

FAO.No. 75 of 2018

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23-02-2018 IN IA 5247/2017 IN AS 115/2012 of ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE-V, ERNAKULAM

¶7

APPELLANT/PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT

¶8

¶9

ANTONY GORDON MENDEZ AGED 71, S/O.LATE MENDEZ, OCCUPIER OF SHOP NO.5, KTDC, SHOPPING COMPLEX, MARINE DRIVE, ERNAKULAM.

¶10

BY ADVS. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW SRI.GIBI.C.GEORGE

¶11

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF :

¶12

K.T.D.C. HOTELS AND RESORTS LTD.

¶13

(GOVT OF KERALA UNDERTAKING), CORPORATE OFFICE, YATHRI NIVAS, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014, KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL OFFICER AND REGIONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE (CENTRAL), KOCHI.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.P.A.AHAMED, SC, KTDC LTD.

¶15

THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03.10.2018, ALONG WITH FAO 79/2018, FAO 83/2018 AND FAO 105/2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

FAO Nos.75, 79, 83 and 105 of 2018

¶17

¶18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶19

PRESENT

¶20

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD

¶21

WEDNESDAY,THE 03RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 11TH ASWINA, 1940

¶22

FAO.No. 79 of 2018

¶23

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23-02-2018 IN IA 5249/2017 IN AS 118/2012 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE-V, ERNAKULAM

¶24

APPELLANT/PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT :

¶25

ANTONY GORDON MENDEZ AGED 71, S/O. LATE MENDEZ, OCCUPIER OF SHOP NO. 5, KTDC, SHOPPING COMPLEX, MARINE DRIVE, ERNAKULAM.

¶26

BY ADVS. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW SRI.GIBI.C.GEORGE

¶27

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF :

¶28

K.T.D.C HOTELS AND RESORTS LTD

¶29

(GOVT. OF KERALA UNDERTAKING), CORPORATE OFFICE, YATHRI NIVAS, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014, KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL OFFICER AND REGIONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE (CENTRAL), KOCHI.

¶30

BY ADV. SRI.P.A.AHAMED, SC, KTDC LTD.

¶31

THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03.10.2018, ALONG WITH FAO 75/2018, FAO 83/2018 AND FAO 105/2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶32

¶33

FAO Nos.75, 79, 83 and 105 of 2018

¶34

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶35

PRESENT

¶36

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD

¶37

WEDNESDAY,THE 03RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 11TH ASWINA, 1940

¶38

FAO.No. 83 of 2018

¶39

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23-02-2018 IN IA 5529/2017 IN AS 110/2012 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE-V, ERNAKULAM

¶40

APPELLANT/PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT :

¶41

C.R. LOPEZ

¶42

AGED 64, S/O LATE. A.J LOPEZ, OCCUPIER OF SHOP NO.7, KTDC SHOPPING COMPLEX, MARINE DRIVE, ERNAKULAM.

¶43

BY ADV. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW

¶44

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF :

¶45

K.T.D.C. HOTELS AND RESORTS LTD. (GOVT. OF KERALA UNDERTAKING), CORPORATE OFFICE, YATHRI NIVAS, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014, KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL OFFICER AND REGIONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE (CENTRAL), KOCHI.

¶46

BY ADV. SRI.P.A.AHAMED, SC, KTDC LTD.

¶47

THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03.10.2018, ALONG WITH FAO 75/2018, FAO 79/2018 AND FAO 105/2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶48

¶49

FAO Nos.75, 79, 83 and 105 of 2018

¶50

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶51

PRESENT

¶52

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD

¶53

WEDNESDAY,THE 03RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 11TH ASWINA, 1940

¶54

FAO.No. 105 of 2018

¶55

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23-02-2018 IN IA 5456/2017 IN AS 119/2012 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE-V, ERNAKULAM

¶56

APPELLANT/PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT

¶57

¶58

RAHEEMA BASHEER

¶59

W/O.BASHEER, AGED 56, RESIDING AT XLIV/2234, ASOKA ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI-682017.

¶60

BY ADVS. SRI.T.B.THANKAPPAN SRI.ASHISH VIDYADHARAN SRI.T.T.HARIKUMAR

¶61

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF :

¶62

K.T.D.C HOTELS AND RESORTS LTD.,

¶63

(GOVT. OF KERALA UNDERTAKING), CORPORATE OFFICE YATHRI NIVAS, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014, KERALA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL OFFICER AND REGIONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE (CENTRAL), COCHIN.

¶64

BY ADVS.

¶65

SRI.P.A.AHAMMED, SC, KTDC SRI.THOUFEEK AHAMED

¶66

THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03.10.2018,ALONG WITH FAO 75/2018, FAO 79/2018 AND FAO 83/2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶67

FAO Nos.75, 79, 83 and 105 of 2018

¶68

¶69

COMMON JUDGMENT

¶70

Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the standing counsel for the respondent.

¶71

In all these cases, grievance of the appellants is that the application filed in each case under Order XLI Rule 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 before the court below, for rehearing the appeals, was disallowed. The appeals were allowed on 04.10.2017 and the applications for rehearing filed subsequently were dismissed for no reason, is the grievance.

¶72

It is seen that the respondent herein(common in all cases) is the plaintiff in suits for eviction of the appellants/defendants and other tenants from plaint schedule rooms stating that rent was in arrears. Further, the plaintiff contended that the period of agreement was over and therefore, the tenants have no right to continue occupation. The suits were dismissed by the trial court against which the landlord/KTDC Hotels and Resorts Ltd. filed appeals before the court below. The appeals pending

¶73

FAO Nos.75, 79, 83 and 105 of 2018

¶74

¶75

before the court below were allowed in the absence of the appellants herein (respondents before the lower court). In a similar matter, a learned single Judge of this Court has passed a judgment dated 12.07.2018 setting aside the impugned order. I find the same yardstick should be adopted in these cases as well.

¶76

In the result, all the appeals are allowed. Impugned orders passed by the lower appellate court under Order XLI Rule 21 of the Code are set aside. The appellate judgments are also set aside. The matter is remitted back to the court below for fresh disposal in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity to the appellants herein to present their case on merits. Parties shall appear before the court below on 15.10.2018.

¶77

All pending interlocutory applications will stand closed.

Sd/-

A.HARIPRASAD

JUDGE

Antony Gorden Mendez v. K.T.D.C. Hotels and Resorts Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Antony Gorden Mendez v. K.T.D.C. Hotels and Resorts Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lisha K.B. Vs Siva Binu

M.B.Ambujakshi Vs M.S.Narayanan Nair

Karunakaran Vs Land Tribunal

Aneez Adam Koyappathody Vs Anshad Nazim

C.K.Ravindran Vs C.K.Janaki Amma

Ananga. S Vs Union of India