Court emphasizes the need for equitable treatment in expedited hearings in eviction cases, balancing urgency with due process.

J U D G M E N T Dated this the 17^th day of February, 2026 Soumen Sen, C. J.

Heard Mr. M. R. Dhanil, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. In the eviction proceedings initiated by the present petitioner, an order was passed on 27.09.2024 by the Rent Control Court, against which R.C.A. No. 187 of 2024 was preferred by the 1^st respondent herein. The said appeal is pending consideration.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of a coordinate Bench presided over by Mr. Justice A. K. Jayasankaran Nambiar in Prema Joy and another v. John Britto¹, wherein petitions were filed seeking out-of-turn or early disposal of the appeal. Paragraph 7 of the judgment reads as follows:

“7. If any party desires to have its heard out of turn, it shall move an application for an early or out- of-turn hearing based on any justifiable or valid

1 2023 (4) KHC 39

reasons before the court concerned and, the Rent Control Court/Appellate authority as the case may be shall dispose of such an application as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two weeks from the date of moving such application. Brief speaking orders will have to be passed by the said courts, either allowing or rejecting the prayer for an early hearing. The courts will bear in mind that the normal rule is to go by the queue, and only in exceptional cases where justifiable and genuine reasons are made out requests for taking up cases on a priority basis should be entertained. Only after the above exercise is done can a litigant approach this Court with a prayer seeking expeditious disposal of the case. This, we feel, will ensure avoidance of any kind of judicial injustice by the Court contributing its part to the delay in the dispensation of justice by indiscriminate entertainment of the types of petitions noticed above. Equality before law implies an absence of any special privilege. So does equal protection of laws by ensuring equality of treatment among people in similar circumstances. All litigants are to be accorded the same treatment by administering law in an even- handed manner.

Accordingly, these original petitions are closed without prejudice to the petitioners' right to move the court concerned with an application as stated above. The Courts concerned will deal with the applications as directed in this judgment. The Registrar (District Judicary) is directed to communicate this order to all Rent Control Appellate Authorities and to Rent Control Courts, forthwith for compliance.”

4. We are informed that the Rent Control Appellate Authority has posted the application for hearing on 27.02.2026.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aged 74 years and is a cancer patient presently undergoing treatment, and therefore seeks expeditious disposal of the appeal.

6. In view of the fact that the matter is listed before the Appellate Authority on 27.02.2026, we request the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Thrissur, to consider and dispose of the application in the light of the observations contained in paragraph No. 7 in Prema Joy (supra), and if deemed appropriate, to dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible, subject to the convenience of the court.

7. Having regard to the nature of the order passed, we do not propose to issue notice to the respondents.

8. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.

Sd/-