High CourtsDivision Bench(2026) 07 KL CK 1571

K. Khader Nazeer vs Mohammed Anwar K.

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 30 July 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Soumen Sen, C.J · Syam Kumar V.M., J
CASE NUMBER
RCREV. NO. 89 OF 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 370 words

ORDER

Soumen Sen, C.J.

We have heard Mr. Ismail Shahar, learned counsel representing Mr. K.R. Vinod, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Aaditya Nair, learned counsel for the respondent.

2.

There appears to be a delay of 13 days in preferring R.C.A.No.14 of 2026 before the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Ernakulam and the Rent Control Appellate Authority dismissed the application for condonation of delay on the ground that the petitioner was unable to explain the delay of 13 days. We feel that the District Judge/Rent Control Appellate Authority was too technical in dismissing the said application without giving an opportunity to the petitioner to challenge the impugned order and obtain a decision on merits.

3.

We admitted the revision petition and granted a limited stay in view of the fact that, if the execution proceedings continued, the appeal may become infructuous and was likely to cause hardship to the petitioner.

4.

Today, the landlord is represented by the learned counsel Mr. Aaditya Nair.

5.

The order passed by the Rent Control Appellate Author-ity dismissing the delay condonation application shall stand set aside. By consent of the parties, we take up the application for condonation of delay on record and dispose of the same by allowing the said application. Consequently, R.C.A. No.14 of 2026 can be heard on merits.

6.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for stay of the impugned order, which is, however, opposed by the learned counsel for the landlord on the ground that as on date, a sum of ₹4,00,000/- is due towards arrears of rent.

7.

The petitioner, upon depositing a sum of ₹2,00,000/-before the execution court, shall be entitled to stay of execution proceedings until any order that may be passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority in the said proceedings. There shall be an unconditional stay of the execution proceedings for a period of two weeks from date and in the event the said amount is deposited before the execution court, the order of stay shall continue till a final decision is taken by the Rent Control Appellate Authority. We make it clear that we have not gone into the merits of the appeal.

The rent control revision is disposed of.