K.I. George vs K. Sadik

K.T. Sankaran, J.—The petitioner is the respondent in R.C.(O.P.) No. 73 of 2012 on the file of the Rent Control Court, Kollam. The R.C. (O.P.) was filed by the respondent under Sections 11(2)(b) and 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act. The Rent Control Court allowed the R.C.(O.P.) as per the order dated 4.6.2013. The petitioner/tenant was set ex-parte since he did not appear at the time when the case was taken up for trial. He did not even file a counter statement in the Rent Control Petition. The petitioner filed I.A.No.2864 of 2014 to set aside the ex-parte order with a petition to condone the delay of 384 days. Meanwhile, execution proceedings were initiated and delivery was ordered. The petitioner filed O.P.(R.C.) No. 88 of 2014 for staying execution proceedings till the application for setting aside the ex-parte order is considered by the Rent Control Court. O.P.(R.C.)No.88 of 2014 was dismissed on 11.7.2014.

The petitioner again approached this Court with this O.P.(R.C.) for the following reliefs:

(a) Call for the records in E.P.No.90/2013 in R.C.O.P.73/2012 on the file of the court of the Rent Control Court, Kollam.

(b) To pass an order keeping in abeyance all proceedings in E.P.No.90/2013 in R.C.(O.P.) No. 73/2012 on the file of the Court of the Rent Control Court, Kollam for a period to be fixed by this Hon''ble Court and

(c) Pass any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon''ble Court may deem fit to issue and the petitioner may pray from time to time.

Advocate Mathew Abraham appears for the respondent.

In the O.P.(R.C.) it is stated that fancy articles worth about Rs.50lakhs are stored in the petition schedule building. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the only relief which the petitioner presses is that he may be granted two months'' time to give vacant possession of the petition schedule building to the landlord, so that by that time the tenant can shift the articles stored by him in the petition schedule building. The learned senior counsel submitted that the petitioner undertakes not to press the application for setting aside the ex-parte order and also undertakes to pay the entire arrears of rent within two weeks from today.

The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the landlord agrees to grant one month''s time to the petitioner to vacate the premises. The learned counsel submitted that sufficient safeguards may be provided to protect the interests of the landlord. On the basis of the consensus arrived at between the parties as mentioned above, the O.P. (R.C.) is disposed of with the following directions:

(i) The petitioner/tenant is granted one month''s time to vacate the petition schedule building.

(ii) Grant of time is subject to the following conditions :

(a) The petitioner shall deposit the entire arrears of rent before the Rent Control Court on or before 29.7.2014, for payment to the respondent/landlord.

(b) The petitioner/tenant shall file an application before the Rent Control Court on or before 22.7.2014 stating that he does not press the application to set aside the ex-parte order of eviction and the petition for condonation of delay.

(c) The petitioner shall file an affidavit before the Rent Control Court on or before 18.7.2014 unconditionally undertaking to comply with the above conditions and also unconditionally undertaking to vacate the petition schedule building within one month. The executing court shall post the Execution Petition on 18.7.2014 and if the petitioner fails to file the affidavit as mentioned above on that day, the executing court shall pass appropriate orders to effect delivery forthwith.

(iii) Till 18.7.2014 delivery shall not be effected.

(iv) If the petitioner fails to comply with any of the conditions mentioned above, delivery shall be effected forthwith. If he complies with the above conditions, execution proceedings shall be kept in abeyance till the expiry of the one month.