Sunish S. Anand vs Daisy Louice on 3 July, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

RCRev..No. 58 of 2004(B)


1. SUNISH S. ANAND, AGED 27,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. DAISY LOUICE, W/O. LOUIS, AGED 54,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.THIRUMALA P.K.MANI

                For Respondent  :SRI.V.R.GOPU [CAVEATOR]

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI

 Dated :03/07/2009

 O R D E R
          PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.
                       - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                             R.C.R.No. 58 OF 2004
                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                      Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2009

                                     ORDER

Pius.C.Kuriakose, J.

Under challenge in this revision petition filed by the tenant is the

order of the Rent Control Court impounding a document which was

produced by the tenant and the judgment of the Rent Control Appellate

Authority confirming the order of the Rent Control Court. The

submission of Sri.A.Ahzar, learned counsel for the revision petitioner

that the revision petitioner never wanted to have the document marked

and much less received as evidence in the case is not resisted by

anybody. Learned counsel’s submission was that the document was not

produced by the tenant directly and was produced on an application

from the custody of the third party. The Rent Control Court, on

receiving the document straight away passed the order directing

impounding of the document. We are convinced that it is only when

the document was attempted to be put in evidence by the revision

petitioner that the learned Rent Control Court passed the impugned

RCR.No.58/04 2

order. But the fact remains that the document was never received as

evidence or relied on by the revision petitioner. We are told that the

issue between the parties is over. Under these circumstances, we are of

the view that the document has become irrelevant also, since the

tenancy has been terminated and building has been surrendered. Under

the above circumstances, without going into the merits of the matter,

we set aside the impugned order of the Rent Control Court and the

judgment of the Rent Control Appellate Authority on the basis that the

issue no longer survives for consideration.

PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE
JUDGE

P.Q.BARKATH ALI
JUDGE

sv.

RCR.No.58/04 2