Paul and Thressia vs Nixon and Chakkalakkal Lazar Baby

Pius C. Kuriakose, J.—The tenants revision Petitioners have filed this RP urging that in a subsequent civil proceeding Ext.A7 document of title under which the contesting Respondents obtained title to the property was set aside. It is submitted by Mr. Dilip J. Akkara, learned Counsel for the revision Petitioners that Ext.A7 document of title has been set aside by the insolvency court in IP No. 18 of 2002 of the Subordinate Judge''s Court, Thrissur. According to Mr. Akkara the above order of the insolvency court is a subsequent event having a fundamental impact on the entitlement of the Respondents to evict the review Petitioners on the strength of Ext.A1 rent chit. Learned Counsel for the Respondent submitted that he is not presently having instructions from the Respondent. The entire file has been returned to the Respondents after the RCR was over. He requested that notice may be issued to the Respondents.

We have considered the rival submissions addressed before us. We are at a loss to see how an insolvency court can set aside a document of title in an insolvency proceedings. However, in view of the assertion of Mr. Akkara that A7 was set aside with notice to the landlords we are inclined to dispose of the RP issuing the following directions:

The learned Rent Control Appellate Authority while taking fresh decision on the basis of our order dated 20th May 2010 will consider the implications of the order in I.P.18 of 2002 canceling Ext.A7 document of sale in favour of the landlords. We make it clear that it is open to the Respondents to urge before the Rent Control Appellate Authority that the order of the insolvency court cannot have any effect on their eligibility to evict the review Petitioners under the provisions of the Rent Control Act.