THOMAS MATHAI Vs. A. ARJUNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, a 54 year old man has filed this original petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the Rent Control Court, Thiruvananthapuram to expedite the trial and final disposal of Ext. P1, R.C.P. filed by him. According to the petitioner, the respondent/tenant is adopting several delaying tactics in the case and therefore unless specific directions are issued, the Rent Control Court may not be inclined to take a decision in Ext. P1 early. Smt. Mini Gangadharan, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent has filed an Interlocutory Application before the Rent Control Court for issuance of a commission. Even that application, according to the learned counsel, is a delaying tactics. We do not think so, it is seen that the respondent has taken a plea that he is entitled for the protection of the second proviso to Sub -section (3) of Section 11 and the commission is sought to be issued in the context of adducing evidence for substantiating the above contention.

(2.) HAVING considered the averments in the original petition and the submissions made at the Bar by Smt. Mini Gangadharan, we are of the view that even without issuing notice to the respondent, relief to a certain extent can be given to the petitioner. Hence, we dispose of the original petition on the following terms: