JUDGMENT SOUMEN SEN, C.J .

Heard Ms. Keerthi B. Chandran, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. V.V. Surendran, learned counsel for respondent No.1.

2. This revision is arising out an order passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority in an appeal preferred by the tenant, in which the Appellate Authority found that there are prima facie materials in favour of the appellants to get stay of further proceedings. However, it was observed that further proceedings would be stayed only on condition of deposit of admitted arrears of rent.

3. The facts reveal that the present petitioner in the RCP is not the owner of the property, as she has sold the property to a third party, and no proceedings have been initiated by the present owner against the respondent for arrears of rent or for any other relief. The issue of maintainability raised by the petitioner cannot be brushed aside. Under such circumstances, we direct the Rent Control Appellate Authority to decide the issue of landlord-tenant relationship in the appeal, without insisting on the deposit of the admitted arrears of rent. However, we place it on record that the tenant in the proceedings has admitted that a sum of Rs.1,27,500/