JACOB @ RAJU Vs. T.R. HARIKRISHNAN AND CLEETUS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Rent Control Revision is filed by the 2 respondent in R.C.P. No.77 of 2008 on the file of the Rent Control Court, Ernakulam challenging the order in I.A. No. 1006 of 2011 and the judgment in R.C.A.No.14 of 2012 on the file of the Appellate Authority, Ernakulam, arising from the order in I.A. No. 1006 of 2011. By the order in I.A. No. 1006 of 2011, the Rent Control Court found that the denial of title set up by the 2nd respondent in the R.C.P. is not bona fide and that it was not necessary to refer the claim of kudikidappu made by him to the Land Tribunal. That order was confirmed in appeal.

(2.) WHEN the R.C.R. came up for hearing, the parties opted to have the disputes considered for settlement before the Mediation Centre. Accordingly, the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre.

(3.) THE 1st respondent/landlord agrees that he will pay to the Revision Petitioner an amount 3 of 3,50,000/ - towards cost of improvement. Out of this amount of 3,50,000/ -, an amount of 50,000/ - is paid today to the Revision Petitioner, the receipt of which is acknowledged by the Revision Petitioner. The balance amount 3,00,000/ - will be paid to the Revision Petitioner on the Revision Petitioner and the 2 respondent surrendering the petition schedule building to the 1st respondent/landlord.