Equitable treatment in judicial proceedings mandates timely hearings without preferential treatment unless justified.

JUDGMENT Dated this the 27^th day of February, 2026 Soumen Sen , C.J.

We have heard Ms. P. Krishnapriya, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. The grievance of the petitioner in this petition appears to be that R.C.P. No. 99 of 2021 filed on 19 July 2021 has not been disposed of so far. It appears that earlier, by judgment dated 19.10.2022 in O.P.(RC) No. 200 of 2022, a direction was issued while the rent control proceedings were still pending. The said matter was decided ex parte on 23.03.2023, however, the said order was recalled on 14.03.2025 on an application filed by the 1^st respondent. It is stated that the matter is posted for hearing on 13.02.2026. We are informed that the respondents have filed an application challenging the maintainability of the proceedings.

3. In view of the judgment of a co-ordinate 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, in paragraph 7 of the judgment it was observed thus:

“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 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

1 2023 (4) KHC 39

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. In view of the fact that the matter is pending since 2021, we request the III Additional Munsiff (Rent Control) Court, Ernakulam to consider and dispose of R.C.P.No.99 of 2021, in the light of the observations contained in paragraph 7 in Prema Joy (supra), as expeditiously as possible, subject to the convenience of the court. The said court shall endeavour to avoid granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties unless it is unavoidable.

5. Having regard to the nature of the order passed, we do not propose to issue notice to the respondents. 6. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.

Sd/-