(1.) THE respondents filed R.C.P. Nos. 101, 102 and 103 of 2009 on the file of the Rent Control Court, Ernakulam under Section 11 (3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act. The petition schedule buildings in the three cases form part of the main building. The landlords stated that they need the petition schedule building in the three cases for their bonafide need of own occupation.
(2.) ABY Abraham, the petitioner in this R.C.R. is the tenant in R.C.P. No.102 of 2009. All the rent control petitions were ordered to be tried jointly. However, on 12.10.2011 Aby Abraham, the tenant in R.C.P. No.102 of 2009 was set ex-parte and the trial was proceeded. The petitioner (Aby Abraham) had filed I.A. No.6127 of 2011 to hear the question of denial of title as a preliminary issue. That application was dismissed on 17.10.2011. On 27.10.2011, the petitioner filed I.A. No.6731 of 2011 to set aside ex-parte order. That application was dismissed for default on 29.10.2011.
(3.) ON 23.3.2012, the petitioner filed I.A. Nos.2203 of 2012 and 2204 of 2012 to set aside the ex-parte order dated 2.11.2011 and to condone the delay of 117 days in filing the application for setting aside ex-parte order respectively. Those applications were dismissed by the Rent Control Court by the order dated 11.7.2012. Challenging that order, the petitioner filed R.C.A. No.68 of 2012 before the Rent Control Appellate Authority. There was a delay of 18 days in filing the appeal and an application was filed to condone the delay. Challenging the final order dated 2.11.2011 in R.C.P. No.102 of 2009, the petitioner filed R.C.A. No.69 of 2012 before the Rent Control Appellate Authority along with an application to condone the delay of 312 days. The Appellate Authority dismissed the applications for condonation of delay in R.C.A. Nos.68 and 69 of 2012 and consequently dismissed those appeals on 31.10.2012. The present Rent Control Petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 31.10.2012 passed by the Appellate Authority.