Litigants must not misuse court processes by delaying proceedings through tactics; ex-parte orders can be justified amid such behavior.

ORDER Dated this the 27^th day of March, 2026 Soumen Sen , C.J .

The proceedings for the rent control petition was filed in the year 2013 and it appears that the present petitioners had been successfully dragging the proceedings for almost 11 years by adopting dilatory tactics one after another.

2. The Rent Control Petition was decreed ex-parte in the year 2019 and later restored at the instance of the present petitioners. When the matter was posted for trial, the present petitioners appear to have willfully abstained from appearing before the court, resulting in the second ex-parte order being passed on 12.04.2024. It is said to be explained before the First Appellate Court that after passing of the order, she left India on 14.10.2024 and returned to India on 14.02.2025. Since she could not reach Ernakulam alone, she reached Ernakulam only on 27.03.2025. Subsequently, C.M.A. was filed instead of filing R.C.A. under Section 18 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act , 1965, and hence the delay has occurred. There is no explanation offered for not pursuing the R.C.P. after the suit was restored and heard afresh. Her absence during the trial for the second time clearly shows that the petitioners were adopting dilatory tactics.

3. In the absence of the explanation offered for not participating for the second time before an ex-parte order was passed on 12.04.2024, we are inclined to accept the findings of the Appellate Court. A litigant cannot be allowed to play fast and loose with the Court. There has been suppression of materials as well. The findings of the Appellate Court being found to be rational based on consideration of relevant facts and taking into consideration the conduct of the parties, in the revisional jurisdiction, we are not inclined to interfere with the discretion exercised by the First Appellate Court in deciding the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

4. The Rent Control Revision stands dismissed.