JUDGMENT :

A.HARIPRASAD, J.

Similar questions are raised in these original petitions. We, therefore, heard the petitions together. Orders impugned in both these petitions are marked as Ext.P4. Ext.P4 orders were passed by the Rent Control Court, Kozhikode, on separate applications filed by the petitioners for remitting the report and sketch submitted by the Advocate Commissioner appointed for conducting local inspection. Request made by the petitioners for remittal of the Commissioner's report and sketch was declined and hence, they are before this Court.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and respondents.

3. Respondents in both these original petitions are the same landlords, who filed applications for eviction of the tenants/petitioners. They claimed eviction on the ground of bona fide need for own occupation referable to Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965(for short, 'the BRC Act'). Ext.P2 in each case is the report and sketch submitted by the Commissioner. Ext.P3 is the application filed by the petitioners in each case for remitting the Commissioner's sketch and report.

4. After hearing the rival contentions, the impugned order was pass