AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
39 paragraphs · 300 words1.The petitioner is the tenant against whom an ex
parte order of eviction has been passed in
RCP.206/2015 by the Additional Munsiff Court-I,
Koyhikode. Aggrieved by the said order, though
he had filed I.A.4321/2016 to set aside the said
ex parte order and the same was allowed on
conditions, he could not comply with the
conditions and thereby the said IA was also
dismissed. The petitioner again filed RP IA.
531/2017. But the said IA was also dismissed on
default. Then the petitioner again filed
I.A.1803/2017 to restore RP IA.531/2017 along
with an application to condone delay in filing
the same and the said I.A was adjourned to
22.7.2017. But in the meanwhile, the learned
Munsiff got transferred and thereafter there is
no sitting in the said court. In the meantime,
the respondent has proceeded with execution of
the ex parte order of eviction by Ext.P2
petition and now delivery has been ordered and
the officials are taking hasty steps to effect
delivery. If delivery is effected before
considering Ext.P2 application, the petitioner
will be put to great difficulty and hardship.
2.On the above premise, the petitioner has
preferred this Original Petition under Article
227 of the Constitution of India seeking a
direction to the Rent Control Court to consider
and pass orders on Ext.P2 within a specified
time and to stay the execution of the ex parte
decree till the disposal of Ext.P2.
3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
4.Considering the facts and circumstances, we find
that Ext.P2 requires disposal at the earliest.
Consequently the Rent Control Court is directed
to dispose of Ext.P2 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment and all further execution proceedings
pursuant to Ext.P3 will stand deferred till the
disposal of Ext.P2 petition.