Dismissed

Stella Joseph v. M.R. Dileep Kumar

Kerala HC6 Sept 2021RCRev./35/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ernakulam disposed of a rent control revision petition filed by a tenant challenging an appellate authority's order. The petitioner sought to withdraw the petition relying on a Division Bench decision, which the Court accepted. The rent control court was directed to dispose of pending applications promptly.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition dismissed as withdrawn; Rent Control Court directed to dispose of applications within one and five months.

Stella Joseph Vs M.R. Dileep Kumar — Landlord and Tenant | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU

¶6

MONDAY, THE 6^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 15TH BHADRA, 1943

¶7

RCREV. NO. 35 OF 2021

¶8

AGAINST JUDGMENT DATED 20.01.2021 IN R.C.A.NO.50/2018 OF THE RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY (PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE), ERNAKULAM AND ORDER DATED 21.08.2018 IN I.A.NO.3693/2018 IN R.C.P.NO.35/2017 OF THE RENT CONTROL COURT (III ADDL.

¶9

MUNSIFF), ERNAKULAM

¶10

REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:

¶11

STELLA JOSEPH, AGED 61 YEARS W/O.JOSEPH, RESIDING AT CHETTIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PADIVATTOM, EDAPPALLY.P.O., KOCHI-24.

¶12

BY ADVS. K.R.VINOD SMT.M.S.LETHA KUM.K.S.SREEREKHA SHRI.ARUN SEBASTIAN SHRI.KURIAN MAXIE

¶13

RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶14

M.R. DILEEP KUMAR, AGED 54 YEARS XS/O.RAGHAVAN, RESIDING AT ERAMATH HOUSE, PADIVATTOM, EDAPPALLY P.O., KOCHI-24, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT PARANKISSERY HOUSE, DOOR NO.XIII/III, AZAD ROAD, ALUVA-683 101.

¶15

BY ADVS. ANIL S.RAJ K.N.RAJANI RADHIKA RAJASEKHARAN P. ANILA PETER

¶16

THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

R.C.R.No.35 of 2021

-2-

O R D E R

Anil K. Narendran, J.

¶21

The petitioner, who is the tenant in R.C.P.No.35 of 2017 on the file of the Rent Control Court (III Additional Munsiff), Ernakulam and the respondent in R.C.A.No.50 of 2018 on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority (Principal District Judge), Ernakulam, has filed this revision under Section 20 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, challenging the judgment of the Rent Control Appellate Authority dated 20.01.2021 in R.C.A.No.50 of 2018, arising out of the order of the Rent Control Court dated 21.08.2018 in I.A.No.3963 of 2018 in R.C.P.No.35 of 2017, an application filed under Section 12 of the Act. In R.C.P.No.35 of 2017, the landlord is seeking an order of eviction under Section 11(2)(b) and 11(3) of the Act.

¶22

On 12.02.2021 when this revision came up for admission, this Court admitted the matter on file and issued notice to the respondent. In I.A.No.1 of 2021 this Court granted an interim order staying the operation of the order of

¶23

R.C.R.No.35 of 2021

¶24

-3-

¶25

the Rent Control Appellate Authority dated 20.01.2021 in R.C.A.No.50 of 2018 and all further proceedings in R.C.P.No.35 of 2017 on the file of the Rent Control Court, for a period of three months. The said interim order, which was extended from time to time, is still in force.

¶26

On 24.08.2021, when this revision came up for consideration, the respondent entered appearance through counsel and sought time to file counter affidavit. Learned counsel for the petitioner sought time to file an affidavit of the petitioner explaining the facts and circumstances in which the present address of the landlord is shown as “Parankissery House, Door No.XIII/III, Azad Road, Aluva-683 101”, in the cause title of this revision.

¶27

Pursuant to order dated 24.08.2021, an affidavit dated 25.08.2021 of the petitioner-tenant is placed on record, on 02.09.2021 . The second page of that affidavit is missing and explanation has been called for from the concerned Filing Scrutiny Officer, by a separate order dated this date.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner-tenant

¶29

R.C.R.No.35 of 2021

¶30

-4-

¶31

and also the learned counsel for the respondent-landlord.

¶32

I.A.No.3963 of 2018 in R.C.P.No.35 of 2017 is one

¶33

filed by the landlord, under Section 12 of the Act, seeking an order directing the tenant to remit admitted arrears of rent in respect of the petition schedule building, together with interest, within the time limit prescribed in the proviso to Section 12(2) of the Act.

¶34

7 . Section 12 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act deals with payment or deposit of rent during the pendency of proceedings for eviction. As per sub-section (1) of Section 12, no tenant against whom an application for eviction has been made by a landlord under Section 11, shall be entitled to contest the application before the Rent Control Court under that Section, or to prefer an appeal under Section 18 against any order made by the Rent Control Court on the application, unless he has paid or pays to the landlord, or deposits with the Rent Control Court or the A ppellate Authority, as the case may be, all arrears of rent admitted by the tenant to be due in respect of the building up to the date

¶35

R.C.R.No.35 of 2021

¶36

-5-

¶37

of payment or deposit, and continues to pay or to deposit any rent which may subsequently become due in respect of the building, until the termination of the proceedings before the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority, as the case may be. As per sub-section (2) of Section 12, the deposit under sub-section (1) shall be made within such time as the c ourt may fix and in such manner as may be prescribed and shall be accompanied by the fee prescribed for the service of notice referred to in sub-section (4). As per the proviso to subsection (2), the time fixed by the court for the deposit of the arrears of rent shall not be less than four weeks from the date of the order and the time fixed for the deposit of rent which subsequently accrues due shall not be less than two weeks from the date on which the rent becomes due .

¶38

As per sub-section (3) of Section 12 of the Act, i f any tenant fails to pay or to deposit the rent as aforesaid, the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority, as the case may be, shall, unless the tenant shows sufficient cause to the contrary, stop all further proceedings and make an order

¶39

R.C.R.No.35 of 2021

¶40

-6-

¶41

directing the tenant to put the landlord in possession of the building. As per sub-section (4) of Section 12, w hen any deposit is made under sub-section (1), the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority, as the case may be, shall cause notice of the deposit to be served on the landlord in the prescribed manner, and the amount deposited may, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed, be withdrawn by the landlord on application made by him to the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority in that behalf.

¶42

9 . Therefore, sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Act enjoins a tenant, against whom an application for eviction has been made by a landlord under Section 11, to pay to the landlord, or deposit with the Rent Control Court, all arrears of rent admitted by the tenant to be due in respect of the building, up to the date of payment or deposit, and continue to pay or deposit any rent which may subsequently become due in respect of the building, until the termination of the proceedings before the Rent Control Court, in order to contest tha t application for eviction before the Rent Control Court.

¶43

R.C.R.No.35 of 2021

¶44

-7-

¶45

Sub-section (2) of Section 12 enjoins a tenant to pay or deposit the admitted rent under sub-section (1), within such time as the court may fix and in such manner as may be prescribed. The time fixed by the court for the deposit of the arrears of rent and the time fixed for the deposit of rent which subsequently accrues due shall not be less than that specified in the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 12. If any tenant fails to pay or deposit the rent as aforesaid, the Rent Control Court shall, unless the tenant shows sufficient cause to the contrary, stop all further proceedings and make an order directing the tenant to put the landlord in possession of the building, as provided under sub-section (3) of Section 12 of the Act.

¶46

In view of the statutory mandate of sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Act, in an application filed by the landlord under Section 12 of the Act, the Rent Control Court has to order payment of arrears of rent admitted by the tenant to be due in respect of the petition schedule building, up to the date of payment or deposit and the tenant shall also be ordered to

¶47

R.C.R.No.35 of 2021

¶48

-8-

¶49

continue to pay or deposit any rent which may subsequently become due in respect of the building, until the termination of the proceedings before the Rent Control Court.

¶50

11. The petitioner-tenant resisted I.A.No.3963 of 2018 in R.C.P.No.35 of 2017 by filing objection. By the order dated 21.08.2018, the Rent Control Court dismissed that application. Challenging that order, the landlord filed R.C.A.No.50 of 2018. By the judgment dated 20.01.2021, the Rent Control Appellate Authority allowed that appeal, by setting aside the impugned order, and remitting I.A.No.3963 of 2018 to the Rent Control Court, for fresh disposal, after hearing both sides, in the light of the observations made in that judgment.

¶51

12. During the course of arguments, t he learned counsel for the petitioner-tenant seeks permission to withdraw this revision, in view of the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in William Daniel v. Jose [2019 (4) KLT 464] .

¶52

The learned counsel for the respondent-landlord would point out that the Rent Control Petition is of the year 2017 and that, the tenant is adopting various methods to

¶53

R.C.R.No.35 of 2021

¶54

-9-

¶55

protract the final disposal of I.A.No.3693 of 2018, the application filed under Section 12 of the Act, and also R.C.P.No.35 of 2017 filed seeking an order of eviction.

¶56

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner-tenant would point out that in R.C.A.No.50 of 2018 filed by the respondent-landlord, the Rent Control Appellate Authority granted an interim stay, which was in force till the disposal of that appeal by the judgment dated 20.01.2021. The final disposal of the Rent Control Petition was delayed on account of the order of stay granted by the Appellate Authority.

¶57

Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, this revision petition is dismissed as withdrawn, based on the submission made by the learend counsel for the petitioner-tenant.

¶58

The Rent Control Court shall dispose of I.A.No.3963 of 2018, as directed in the judgment dated 20.01.2021 in R.C.A.No.50 of 2018 of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a

¶59

R.C.R.No.35 of 2021

¶60

-10-

¶61

certified copy of this judgment and thereafter, finally dispose of R.C.P.No.37 of 2017, within a further period of five months.

¶62

Sd/-

¶63

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE

Sd/-

K. BABU, JUDGE

R.C.R.No.35 of 2021

-11-

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:

¶71

ANN.A1 E-COURT PROCEEDINGS IN O.S.NO.464/2016 DATED 29.06.2017. ANN.A2 THE COPY OF REPLY NOTICE DATED 07.12.2015

Stella Joseph v. M.R. Dileep Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Stella Joseph v. M.R. Dileep Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Radhakrishna Kartha Vs T.a.Leelamma George

Dr.Lolek Paul Vs Dr.Ruby Mary Pious

M.K.Noorudeen Vs Mohammed Idries

Dosth Motors Vs Sebin K Xavier

Gireesh Kumar Vs J.Benze

Suo Motu Vs Travancore Devaswom Board