JESSY VAZ Vs. CHERIAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The legal representatives of a tenant file these revision petitions. The landlord initiated proceedings under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, hereinafter referred to as the Act, for eviction of the tenant on the ground of arrears of rent and bona fide need for own occupation. The Rent Control Court allowed the application. The tenant then filed an appeal. The appeal was dismissed. The tenant filed a revision before the District Court. Pending the revision petition before the District Court, the tenant died. He died on 24-5-1983. The legal representatives of the deceased revision petitioner, filed an application to implead them as legal representatives of the tenant to continue the revision filed by the deceased tenant. This application is IA 254/83 in CRP No. 9 of 1983. Along with this application, the revision petitioners herein filed IA 255/83 to condone the delay occasioned in filing the application to implead them as the legal representatives of the deceased revision petitioner.

(2.) The learned Judge after considering the application for condoning the delay in filing the application to implead the legal representatives in the place of the deceased revision petitioner, dismissed IA 255/83. The learned District Judge has written a considered order only on this application. Since the application to condone the delay in filing the application to implead the legal representatives has been dismissed, the application to implead the legal representatives, viz. IA 254/83 was also dismissed. Since the application to implead the legal representatives has been dismissed, the learned District Judge dismissed the revision petition holding that the revision petition has abated.

(3.) Against the dismissal of the revision petition, the legal representatives of the tenant have filed CRPNo. 866 of 1985. Against the order refusing to implead them as the legal representatives, they have filed CRP No. 1255 of 1985 and against the order dismissing the application to condone the delay in filing the application to implead the legal representatives they have filed CRP No. 1256 of 1985. As I said earlier, the only reasoned order passed by the learned District Judge is the order impugned in CRP No. 1256/85; and so all these C.R Ps. can be disposed of on the basis of the decision in CRP No. 1256/85.