SANTHOSH K THOMAS Vs. USHA SURESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant is the tenant and respondent in R.C.P.104/2006 before Rent Control Court, Ernakulam. Respondents are the landlords petitioners. Petition Schedule building, admittedly, obtained on rent by the petitioner from Suresh on monthly rent. Suresh admittedly died on 18/1/2004. First respondent is the widow and other respondents, their children.

(2.) By order dated 23/1/2008 Rent Control Court found that the denial of title is not bonafide and the petitioner admittedly paid rent to the respondents, after the death of original landlord and also admitted the monthly rent of Rs.13,8000/- and that it is not paid from 10/12/2005. The petitioner was directed to deposit the arrears of rent at the rate of Rs.13,8000/- from 10/12/2005 within thirty days from the date of the order. Petitioner challenged that order before the Appellate Authority, Ernakulam in R.C.A.57/2008.

(3.) Appellate Authority, Ernakulam heard both the appeals together. As is clear from the order of the Appellate Authority, petitioner only contended that during the pendency of the appeal, he had paid the entire arrears of rent as found by the Rent Control Court directly to the learned counsel appearing for the respondents and even if there was no deposit within the time, as provided under the order under Section 12(1), the Appellate Authority is competent to extent the period and therefore, sought extension of time and to permit the petitioner to contest the R.C.P., Appellate Authority did not consider the question whether existence of security deposit is a bar for passing an order under Section 12(3) even though appellant had contended that the advance is liable to be