Point of Law: High Court could not have re-appreciated the evidence and the concurrent findings rendered by the courts below ought not to have been interfered with by the High Court while exercising revisional jurisdiction.

ORDER :

Anil K. Narendran, J.

The petitioner is the respondent-tenant in R.C.P.No.4 of 2015 on the file of the Rent Control Court (Munsiff), Chengannur, a petition filed by the respondent herein-landlord under Sections 11(2)(b) and 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, seeking eviction of the tenant from the petition schedule building. The tenant opposed the relief sought for in the Rent Control Petition by filing counter. The landlord filed I.A.No.2111 of 2015, an application under Section 12 of the Act, seeking an order directing the tenant to deposit the admitted arrears of rent to the tune of Rs.9,86,076/-and to continue to pay rent for the subsequent period, and in case of default, directing the tenant to give vacant possession of the petition schedule building to the landlord. The tenant opposed the relief sought for in that application, by filing counter. The tenant filed I.A.No.2371 of 2015 raising the question of maintainability of the Rent Control Petition, contending that, as per agreement dated 04.04.2009, the landlord is entitled to seek eviction only after repayment of the advance amount of Rs.59,75,000/-. The landlord filed counter in I.A.No.2371 of 2015, contending that the agreement dated 04.04.2009 is a fabricated document. Chengannur Police had registered a crime against the tenant as Crime No.292/14 for forgery and fabrication of document. Police has already filed final report before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Chengannur.

2. After considering the rival contentions, the Rent Control Court by the order dated 12.01.2016 dismissed I.A.No.2111 of 2015 filed by the landlord and also I.A.No.2371 of 2015 filed by the tenant. Challenging the order of dismissal of I.A.No.2111 of 2015, the landlord filed R.C.A.No.2 of 2016 before the Rent Control Appellate Authority (District Judge), Mavelikkara. Challenging the dismissal of I.A.No.2371 of 2015, the tenant filed R.C.A.No.3 of 2016 before the Appellate Authority. By a common judgment dated 20.12.2016, the Appellate Authority allowed R.C.A.No.2 of 2016 filed by the landlord and dismissed R.C.A.No.3 of 2016 filed by the tenant. By the judgment in R.C.A.No.2 of 2016, the Appellate Authority directed the landlord and the tenant to appear before the Rent Control Court on 23.01.2017, and the tenant was directed to deposit the admitted arrears of rent, within four weeks from 23.01.2017.

3. On 23.01.2017, the landlord and the tenant appeared before the Rent Control Court. As per the direction contained in the judgment of the Appellate Authority in R.C.A.No.2 of 2016, the tenant had to deposit the admitted arrears of rent on or before 22.02.2017. On 22.02.2017, when R.C.P.No.4 of 2015 came up for consideration before the Rent Control Court, the tenant filed I.A.No.246 of 2017 seeking time to deposit the admitted arrears of rent, in instalments. The Rent Control Court adjourned the matter to 15.03.2017, for payment of admitted arrears of rent by the tenant. On 15.03.2017, the matter was adjourned to 20.03.2017. On 20.03.2017, the Rent Control Court dismissed I.A.No.346 of 2017 and passed an order of eviction in R.C.P.No.4 of 2015, under Section 12(3) of the Act.

4. The order of eviction passed by the Rent Control Court dated 20.03.2017 in R.C.P.No.4 of 2015, which is one passed under Section 12(3) of the Act, is appealable before the Rent Control Appellate Authority, under Section 18(1)(b) of the Act, within a period of thirty days from the date of that order.

Instead of filing an appeal against that order, the tenant filed R.C.Rev.No.215 of 2017 before this Court, under Section 20 of the Act, against the judgment of the Appellate Authority in R.C.A.No.3 of 2016. The tenant filed R.C.Rev.No.141 of 2017 against the judgment of the Appellate Authority in R.C.A.No.2 of 2016. On 19.07.2017, when the above Rent Control Revisions came up for consideration, R.C.Rev.No.215 of 2017 filed by the tenant against the judgment in R.C.A.No.3 of 2016 was