Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : SRI.O.RAMACHANDRAN NAMBIAR, SRI. GEEN T.MATHEW.
For the Respondent: SRI. BINOY VASUDEVAN, SRI. R. MANIKANTAN.

Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points concerning the issue of joint trial of Rent Control Petitions under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act:

1. The Rent Control Court does not have an explicit statutory provision for ordering joint trials of multiple Rent Control Petitions. However, it possesses inherent powers under the Civil Procedure Code, specifically Section 151, which allows for joint trials to promote justice and efficiency (!) (!) .

2. The inherent power to order joint trials is recognized when such an approach helps avoid conflicting decisions, delays, or prejudice to parties, provided it is exercised judiciously and in the interest of justice (!) (!) .

3. The exercise of such inherent powers must be based on the facts and circumstances of each case. It is permissible when the issues involved are interconnected, and evidence or facts are common, thereby avoiding duplication and inconsistency in proceedings (!) (!) .

4. Parties’ participation without objection at earlier stages can be considered as acquiescence, but objections raised at a later stage, especially in appellate or revisional courts, may not be entertained if the trial has already been completed and evidence recorded, unless prejudice is demonstrated (!) .

5. The primary considerations for exercising the power to order joint trials include the similarity of issues, the potential for prejudice, and whether the joint trial would facilitate the just and efficient disposal of cases. Objections based solely on the fact that cases are different or that separate trials are preferable should be raised at the earliest opportunity (!) (!) .

6. When multiple petitions involve common questions of law or fact, and joint trial would not cause prejudice to any party, courts may exercise discretion to consolidate proceedings, especially when it promotes judicial economy and consistency (!) (!) .

7. The decision to allow or deny joint trials depends on the specific circumstances, including the nature of the grounds, the evidence to be adduced, and the rights of the parties involved. Objections made only at a late stage or in appeal are generally not favored unless prejudice is clearly established (!) (!) .

8. Overall, the courts emphasize the importance of timely objections regarding joinder or joint trial issues. If objections are not raised at the earliest opportunity, they are unlikely to be entertained in later stages, especially after evidence has been recorded (!) (!) .

Please let me know if you require a more detailed analysis or assistance with drafting legal arguments based on these principles.