SAYYED ALI M. Vs. HAJA MAHEEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent filed R.C.P. No. 7 of 2012 on the file of the Rent Control Court, Thiruvananthapuram under Sections 11(2)(b), 11(3), 11(4)(i) and 11(4)(v) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, against the petitioner. The petitioner/tenant entered appearance before the Rent Control Court and filed an objection. However, the petitioner/tenant failed to appear at the time of trial and he was set ex parte. The Rent Control Court passed an ex parte order of eviction on all the grounds claimed by the landlord, by the order dated 03.07.2013.

(2.) THE petitioner/tenant filed I.A. No. 2351 of 2014 to set aside the ex parte order of eviction. There was delay in filing the application to set aside the ex parte order and to condone the same, the petitioner/tenant filed I.A. No. 2352 of 2014. Though the extent of delay is not filled up in the copy of the application for condonation of delay produced by the petitioner, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the extent of delay is 215 days. The application for condoning the delay is pending disposal before the Rent Control Court. Meanwhile, the respondent/landlord initiated execution proceedings as E.P. No. 308 of 2013 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Thiruvananthapuram. It is submitted that delivery was ordered. At that juncture, the petitioner/tenant filed this original petition with a prayer to stay the proceedings in the execution petition pending disposal of the application for condonation of delay in filing the application for setting aside the ex parte order.

(3.) IT is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent/landlord that the tenant has not even paid the arrears of rent. It is submitted that the tenant is working abroad and he has sublet the building. The learned counsel also pointed out that though the Rent Control Court directed the tenant to produce the passport while dealing with the application filed by the landlord, the tenant did not produce the same. It is submitted that the petitioner/tenant is not entitled to any discretionary relief.