RP No. 635 of 2009 · Kerala High Court

PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P.No.635 OF 2009 IN R.C.R.NO.105 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 10th day of July, 2009ORDERPius.C.Kuriakose, J.Even though Sri.J.S.Ajith Kumar, learned counsel for the review petitioner has addressed us very strenuously and persuasively , we are not persuaded to hold that our judgment warrants invocation of therevisional jurisdiction of this court under Order 47 Rule 1 C.P.C. Thegrievance of the revision petitioner is as regards the observation in paragraph 2 of our judgment that as on the date of the impugned summary order dated 30-09-2008 “ the petitioner tenant had discharged the arrears of rent admitted by him”.2.We made such an observation after referring the pleadingsraised by the parties for determining as to what was the arrears of rent admitted by the tenant. We dispose of the review petition confirming our order, but clarifying that the Rent Control Appellate Authority shall not mis-understand our observation in paragraph 2 of the judgment as any finding by us regarding the amount correctly due from the RP.No.635/092respondent towards arrears of rent in respect of the building. The revision petitioner should be permitted by the appellate authority to withdraw all amounts actually deposited by the respondent before that authority towards arrears of rent. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI JUDGE sv. RP.No.635/092