Roy vs Rani

ROY vs RANI

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 31, 2020

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1838565

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1838565
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice K.Vinod Chandran,Honourable Mr. Justice Ashok Menon
Decided On: Jan 31, 2020
Case Number: RP/1138/2019

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

ROY

Respondent

RANI

Excerpt

in the high court of kerala at ernakulampresent the honourable mr.justice k.vinod chandran & the honourable mr. justice ashok menon friday, the 31st day of january 2020 / 11th magha, 1941 rp.no.1138 of 2019 in op (rc). 167/2019 against the order/judgment in op (rc) 167/2019 of high court of keralareview petitioner/s: roy aged 54 years s/o. lonan, eecharangattu house, elamakkara p. o., edappally south village, kanayannur taluk, ernakulam district - 682 026. by adv. sri.maitheen m.pareeth respondent/s: rani aged 32 years w/o. jose, illiparambil house, kaloor p. o., ernakulam village, kanayannur taluk, ernakulam district - 682 017. this review petition having come up for admission on 31.01.2020, the court on the same day passed the following:judgmentdated this the 31st day of january, 2020vinod chandran, j.the above review petition is filed by thetenant in a rent control petition. before court in the original petition(rc) the tenant prayed for interdicting the proceedings in the rcp on the ground of an i.a questioning the verymaintainability of rcp having been filed before the rent control court. the petitioner also had a submission that the entire rent arrears was deposited.2. the impugned order left the petitioner to prosecute the i.a filed before the rent control court. the withdrawal of the amount was left to the discretion of the rent control court.3. now the petitioner has filed the reviewon the ground that he should be permitted to take back the money deposited before the rent control court. the same can be done only if he establishes that the i.a filed against the maintainability of the rcp is sustainable. we do not find any ground for review. the review petition stands rejected in limine. k. vinod chandran, ashok menon, jma/

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON FRIDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 11TH MAGHA, 1941 RP.No.1138 OF 2019 IN OP (RC). 167/2019 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP (RC) 167/2019 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER/S: ROY AGED 54 YEARS S/O. LONAN, EECHARANGATTU HOUSE, ELAMAKKARA P. O., EDAPPALLY SOUTH VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 682 026. BY ADV. SRI.MAITHEEN M.PAREETH RESPONDENT/S: RANI AGED 32 YEARS W/O. JOSE, ILLIPARAMBIL HOUSE, KALOOR P. O., ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 682 017. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 31st day of January, 2020

Vinod Chandran, J.

The above review petition is filed by the

tenant in a rent control petition.                Before Court in
the    Original     Petition(RC)      the    tenant     prayed      for
interdicting       the   proceedings        in   the   RCP     on    the
ground       of     an    I.A        questioning         the        very

maintainability of RCP having been filed before the Rent Control Court. The petitioner also had a submission that the entire rent arrears was deposited.

2. The impugned order left the petitioner to prosecute the I.A filed before the Rent Control Court. The withdrawal of the amount was left to the discretion of the Rent Control Court.

3. Now the petitioner has filed the review

on the ground that he should be permitted to take back the money deposited before the Rent Control Court. The same can be done only if he establishes that the I.A filed against the maintainability of the RCP is sustainable. We do not find any ground for review. The Review Petition stands rejected in limine. K. VINOD CHANDRAN, ASHOK MENON, Jma/

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2020 Same Parties ROY vs RANI Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice K.Vinod Chandran,Honourable Mr. Justice...