(1.) THE basis for these two Civil Revision Petition is an order of eviction passed against one P.C. Narayanan, a tenant under the respondent herein. THE said P.C. Narayanan died during the pendency of the appeal preferred by him against the eviction order passed by the Rent Controller. His legal representatives have further prosecuted the appeal, and having lost their case in the appeal, now they have preferred these Civil Revision Petitions. For the sake of convenience, the petitioners are hereinafter coll ectively alleged as tenant and the respondent as ?landlord?.
(2.) AT the outset. I would like to make the following comment: I find that the petitioners as well as their predecessor in interest have kept the landlord at bay for long by abusing the process of court and thereby have successfully prevented the landlord from reaping the fruits of the eviction order obtained by him, as early as on 28.10.1980.
(3.) LEARNED counsel on both sides addressed common arguments. Hence these Civil Revision Petitions are disposed of by this common order.