MUKRI GOPALAN versus CHEPPILAT PUTHANPURAYIL ABOOBACKER

MUKRI GOPALAN versus CHEPPILAT PUTHANPURAYIL ABOOBACKER

Appellate authority constituted under Section 18 of Kerala Rent Act, 1965 is not persona designata but functions as a court; Section 29(2) of Limitation Act, 1963 and Section 5 (condonation of delay) are applicable to appeals under the Act; authority may condone delay if sufficient cause is shown.

Parties
Appellant: Mukrigopalan; Respondent: Cheppilat Puthanpura Yil Aboobacker
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
12 July 1995
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Kerala High Court Judgment and Order Dated 22.7.94 in C.r.p.no. 2633 of 1994 G
Outcome
Appeal allowed; orders of High Court and appellate authority quashed; matter remanded to appellate authority for fresh consideration of condonation application.
Legal Topics
Condonation of Delay, Persona Designata, Appellate Authority Power, Application of Limitation Act 1963 Section 29(2), Appeals Under Kerala Rent Act, 1965

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mukrigopalan

Appellant

Cheppilat Puthanpura Yil Aboobacker

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Kerala High Court Judgment and Order Dated 22.7.94 in C.r.p.no. 2633 of 1994 G

  1. 1 Whether appellate authority under Section 18 of Kerala Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 is a persona designata or a court
  2. 2 Whether delay in filing appeal before appellate authority can be condoned by invoking Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963
  3. 3 Applicability of Section 29(2) of Limitation Act, 1963 to appeals under Section 18 of the Kerala Rent Act

Ratio Decidendi

Appellate authority constituted under Section 18 of Kerala Rent Act, 1965 is not persona designata but functions as a court; Section 29(2) of Limitation Act, 1963 and Section 5 (condonation of delay) are applicable to appeals under the Act; authority may condone delay if sufficient cause is shown.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; orders of High Court and appellate authority quashed; matter remanded to appellate authority for fresh consideration of condonation application.

Orders

  • Rent Control Appeal No. 9/94 restored to file of District Judge, Thalassery as appellate authority.
  • Appellate authority to consider I.A. 56/94 (condonation of delay) on merits.