Sreejith vs Geetha
2021 Latest Caselaw 20577 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                    PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
                                       &
                     THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU
         FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 9TH ASWINA, 1943
                               MJC NO.85 OF 2019
  AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OP (RC) 158/2018 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT:

               SREEJITH,
               AGED 36 YEARS,
               S/O JAGADEESAN, KOYIKKAL, ADINADU NORTH P.O., ADINADU
               NORTH,
               K.S. PURAM VILLAGE.
               BY ADV NEENU PAVITHRAN

1st RESPONDENT/DH/PETITIONER IN RCOP 4/2013:

              GEETHA
              AGED 42 YEARS, D/O REMANI, AMBIKA BHAVANAM
              (PUTHUSERRIL),
              ADINADU NORTH, KOTTAKKUMPURAM MURI, K.S. PURAM VILLAGE,
              KARUNAGAPPALLY.
2nd   RESPONDENT/JD/RESPONDENT IN RCOP 4/2013
             NEBUKUMAR,
             AGED 45 YEARS, S/O NATARAJAN, RAJ BHAVAN, ADINADU NORTH,
             KOTTAKKUPURAM MURI, K.S. PURAM VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY.
        THIS   MISCELLANEOUS    JURISDICTION   CASE   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR
ADMISSION ON 01.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 MJC No.85 OF 2019

                                  2


                            JUDGMENT

Anil K. Narendran, J.

On 06.03.2019 and thereafter on 17.09.2021, when

this MJC came up for consideration, there was no representation

for the petitioner. On 24.09.2021, the learned counsel for the

petitioner sought time to file a memo to close the MJC.

2. Today, when the case is taken up for consideration, the

learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo to dismiss the

MJC as not pressed, as the petitioner has already been evicted

from the petition scheduled building in R.C.(OP) No.4 of 2013 on

the file of the Rent Control Court, Karunagappally, and as such,

the relief sought for in OP(RC) No.158 of 2018, which was

dismissed for default on 04.02.2019, has become infructuous.

3. Heard Adv. Ms. Neenu Pavithran, the learned counsel

for the petitioner.

Recording the aforesaid memo filed by the learned

counsel for the petitioner, this MJC is dismissed as not pressed.

Sd/-

ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE

Sd/-

K. BABU JUDGE SSK/01/10