The court underscored the importance of expeditiously addressing the tenant's application to preserve their rights against ex-parte eviction.

JUDGMENT

P.N.RAVINDRAN, J The petitioner is the tenant in R.C.P.No.28 of 2015 on the file of the Rent Control Court, Tirur, a petition filed by the respondent/ landlord for an order of eviction under section 11(2)(b), 11(3), 11(4) (ii) and 11(4)(iii) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short. Though notice was served and the tenant entered appearance through counsel, he did not file a counter statement, with the result he was set exparte on 17.07.2015. Thereafter, an exparte order of eviction was also passed on 05.08.2015. The tenant did not take timely steps to have the exparte order of eviction set aside. A few months later he filed an application to set aside the exparte order of eviction as also the order setting him exparte after condoning the delay of 201 days in filing the application. Such an application was filed on 27.02.2016. This original petition was filed yesterday praying for an order directing the Rent Control Court, Tirur to dispose of the said application before the exparte order of eviction is executed. The reason for invoking this court's jurisdiction is that, the application to set aside the exparte order of eviction has not been numbered, but in the meanwhile the execution of the exparte order of eviction is being proceeded with in E.P.No.395 of 2015 wherein an order for delivery has also been passed.

2. When this original petition came up for admission today in the pre-lunch session, we directed the Registry to ascertain from the Rent Control Court, Tirur as to whether (i) the tenant in R.C.P.No.28 of 2015 has filed an application on 27.02.2016 to set aside the order of eviction passed by the rent control court on 5.8.2015; (ii) whether along with the said application, an application to condone the delay in filing the application to set aside the ex-paprte order of eviction has been filed and (iii) whether the applications have been numbered and if not, the reason why they have not been numbered. Registry was also directed to ascertain whether the order of eviction passed in R.C.P.No.28 of 2015 is sought to be executed and if so, the date to which the execution petition stands posted and the present stage of the execution proceedings. Registry in turn sought information relating to the aforesaid aspects from the Rent Control Court, Tirur. The rent control court has in turn reported that the tenant in R.C.P.No.28 of

2015 has filed an application on 27.02.2016 to set aside the order of eviction passed by the rent control court on 05.08.2015, that in the said application he has prayed for condoning the delay in filing the application, that it has been numbered as I.A.No.646 of 2016 and that it is presently posted to 22.03.2016 for counter and hearing. It is also reported that E.P.No.395 of 2015 stands posted for delivery of the petition schedule building on 11.03.2016.

3. It is evident from the materials before us that the petition filed by the landlord to execute the exparte order of eviction passed in R.C.P.No.28 of 2015 on the file of the Rent control Court, Tirur presently stands posted to 11.03.2016 for delivery of the petition schedule building. It is also evident from the materials before us that the tenant had filed an application on 27.02.2016 to set aside the exparte order of eviction, that it has been numbered and that it stands posted to 22.03.2016 for counter and hearing. The relief sought in the instant original petition is to direct the rent control court to dispose of the said application before the exparte of order of eviction is executed. In other words, all that the tenant wants is to defer the execution of the exparte order of eviction, until such time as orders are passed on the application filed by him to have the exparte order of eviction set aside. Having regard to the very purpose underlying the application to set aside the exparte order of eviction, we are of the opinion that even without notice to the respondent/landl