Jacob Kurian v. A.V. Francis

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANIL K. NARENDRAN ``` ``` & ``` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR ``` ``` WEDNESDAY, THE 24[TH] DAY OF MAY 2023 / 3RD JYAISHTA, 1945 O.P.(RC)NO.93OF 2023 ``` ``` AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31/03/2023 IN I.A.NO.3 OF 2021 IN RCP NO.55 OF 2019 OF THE RENT CONTROL COURT (III ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF), ERNAKULAM ``` ## **`- - PETITIONER/PETITIONER LANDLORD:`** ``` JACOB KURIAN, AGED 64 YEARS, S/O LATE BARRISTER P.K. KURIAN, R/AT 42/1903, ST. BENEDICT ROAD, ERNAKULAM KOCHI-682018, REPRESENTED BY MOHAN KURIAN AGED 66, S/O BARRISTER KURIAN, POWER OF ATTORNY HOLDER OF THE PETITIONER, POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER OF PETITIONER, R/AT 6C WILLMONT PARK CHURCH LANDING ROAD, KOCHI, PIN - 682016 ``` ``` BY ADVS.T.S. MAYA (THIYADIL) K.A. SUNITHA ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/COUNTER PETITONER-TENANT:-`** ``` A.V. FRANCIS, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O A J VARGHESE, BUILDING NO. 40/483-B, GROUND FLOOR, PUTHURAN PLAZA, M.G. ROAD, ERNAKULAM KOCHI, RESIDING AT ALUKKA HOUSE, KUTHIRAVATTOM P.O., KOOTTOLI, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673016 ``` ``` BY ADVS. A. RANJITH NARAYANAN P.N.HARISH BABU(K/1106/1999) A. SIMI(K/489/2002) ``` ``` THIS OP (RENT CONTROL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON ``` ``` 24.05.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 2 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 ## **JUDGMENT** ## **Anil K. Narendran, J.** The petitioner filed R.C.P.No.55 of 2019 before the Rent Control Court (Additional Munsiff-III), Ernakulam, under Sections 11(2)(b) and 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, seeking eviction of the respondent hereintenant from the petition schedule building, on the ground of arrears of rent and _bona fide_ need. In R.C.P.No.55 of 2019 (Ext.P3), the tenant filed a counter statement (Ext.P4). In the RCP, the landlord filed I.A.No.3 of 2021 (Ext.P10), an application under Section 12 of the Act, seeking an order directing the tenant to deposit a sum of Rs.43,60,931/- towards arrears of rent up to the filing of the RCP and a further sum of Rs.94,22,023/towards arrears of rent which fell due subsequent to the filing of the RCP. In I.A.No.3 of 2021, the tenant filed a counter statement (Ext.P11). After considering the rival contentions, the Rent Control Court passed Ext.P12 order dated 07.10.2022 in I.A.No.3 of 2021 in R.C.P.No.55 of 2019, whereby the tenant is directed to pay arrears of rent from March 2020 (excluding the month of April and May 2020) till the date of that order at the rate of Rs.3,52,856/- per month, within 30 days from the date of order. The tenant is also directed to continue to 3 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 remit the rent which may subsequently become due, within 15 days from the respective due dates, till the culmination of the rent control proceedings. The landlord was found entitled to get the costs of the application from the tenant. The tenant filed I.A.No.5 of 2022 (Ext.P13) in I.A.No.3 of 2021, invoking the provisions under Section 12(4) of the Act, seeking an order to record due compliance of Ext.P12 order dated 07.10.2022. In I.A.No.5 of 2022, the landlord filed an objection (Ext.P14). By the order dated 13.03.2023 (Ext.P15), the Rent Control Appellate Authority (1[st] Additional District Judge), Ernakulam dismissed R.C.A.No.55 of 2022 filed by the landlord against Ext.P12 order dated 07.10.2022 in I.A.No.3 of 2021 as not pressed. On 20.03.2023, before the Rent Control Court, the learned counsel for the tenant not pressed I.A.No.5 of 2022, in view of Ext.P15 order in R.C.A.No.55 of 2022. By an order dated 20.03.2023 in RCP No.55 of 2019 (Ext.P16), the Rent Control Court directed the tenant to file a memo regarding payment of rent after 12.10.2022. Pursuant to that direction, the tenant filed a statement (Ext.P17) regarding the payment of rent at the rate of Rs.3,52,856/- per month, for the period from April 2020 to February 2023. Based on Ext.P17 statement, the Rent Control 4 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 Court, by the order dated 31.03.2023 (Ext.P18) closed I.A.No.3 of 2021 filed by the landlord under Section 12 of the Act, stating that the tenant is paying subsequent rent at the rate of Rs.3,52,856/- promptly, as directed in Ext.P12 order dated 07.10.2022. Challenging Exts.P12 and P18 orders of the Rent Control Court, to the extent of taking the admitted rate of rent for the purpose of Section 12 of the Act as Rs.3,52,856/-, instead of the agreed rent of Rs.7,05,711/-, the landlord is before this Court in this original petition, invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. On 13.04.2023, when this original petition came up for admission, this Court admitted the matter on file and issued notice to the respondent-tenant. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner-landlord and the learned counsel for the respondent-tenant. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner-landlord would contend that the rate of rent for the purpose of an application filed under Section 12 of the Act is Rs.7,05,711/- per month, which includes Rs.36,769.18/- for the car parking facility, and therefore, the Rent Control Court committed a grave irregularity 5 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 in taking the rate of rent as Rs.3,52,856/- per month. The learned counsel would point out the admission made by the tenant regarding the rate of rent in paragraph 6 of the reply notice dated 14.02.2019 (Ext.P2), in which the tenant has admitted that the monthly rent of the leasehold premises as of - - that date is Rs.7,05,711/ , which includes Rs.36,769.18/ for the car parking facility. The tenant has admitted the rate of rent as Rs.7,05,711/- per month in paragraph 7 of Ext.P4 counter statement filed in R.C.P.No.55 of 2019 and in paragraph 2 of Ext.P8 letter addressed to the landlord. 5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondenttenant would contend that the rate of rent for the purpose of an application filed under Section 12 of the Act has to be taken as Rs.3,52,856/- since the landlord has agreed in the reply notice dated 11.06.2020 (Ext.P7) to reduce the rent in the rental agreement to 50%, for April and May 2020. The learned counsel would also point out that, as stated in Ext.P8 letter addressed to the landlord, the tenant has filed R.C.P.No.138 of 2018 before the Rent Control Court, invoking the provisions under Section 5(1) of the Act, for fixing fair rent of the leasehold premises at the rate of Rs.70/- per sq.ft., which is now pending 6 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 consideration. 6. Section 12 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act deals with payment or deposit of rent during the pendency of proceedings for eviction. As per Section 12(1), no tenant against whom an application for eviction has been made by a landlord under Section 11, shall be entitled to contest the application before the Rent Control Court under that Section or to prefer an appeal under Section 18 against any order made by the Rent Control Court on the application, unless he has paid or pays to the landlord, or deposits with the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority, as the case may be, all arrears of rent admitted by the tenant to be due in respect of the building up to the date of payment or deposit and continues to pay or to deposit any rent which may subsequently become due in respect of the building, until the termination of the proceedings before the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority, as the case may be. 7. As per Section 12(2) of the Act, the deposit under sub-section (1) shall be made within such time as the court may fix and in such manner as may be prescribed and shall be accompanied by the fee prescribed for the service of notice 7 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 referred to in sub-section (4). As per the proviso to Section 12(2), the time fixed by the court for the deposit of the arrears of rent shall not be less than four weeks from the date of the order and the time fixed for the deposit of rent which subsequently accrues due shall not be less than two weeks from the date on which the rent becomes due. As per Section 12(3) of the Act, if any tenant fails to pay or to deposit the rent as aforesaid, the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority, as the case may be, shall, unless the tenant shows sufficient cause to the contrary, stop all further proceedings and make an order directing the tenant to put the landlord in possession of the building. 8. As per Section 12(4) of the Act, when any deposit is made under sub-section (1), the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority, as the case may be, shall cause notice of the deposit to be served on the landlord in the prescribed manner, and the amount deposited may, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed, be withdrawn by the landlord on application made by him to the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority in that behalf. 9. Section 12(1) of the Act enjoins a tenant, against 8 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 whom an application for eviction has been made by a landlord under Section 11, to pay to the landlord, or deposit with the Rent Control Court, all arrears of rent admitted by the tenant to be due in respect of the building, up to the date of payment or deposit, and continue to pay or deposit any rent which may subsequently become due in respect of the building, until the termination of the proceedings before the Rent Control Court, in order to contest that application for eviction before the Rent Control Court. Similarly, Section 12(1) of the Act enjoins a tenant, in order to prefer an appeal under Section 18 of the Act against any order made by the Rent Control Court on an application made by a landlord under Section 11, to pay the landlord, or deposits with the Appellate Authority, all arrears of rent admitted by the tenant to be due in respect of the building, up to the date of payment or deposit, and continues to pay or to deposit any rent which may subsequently become due in respect of the building, until the termination of the proceedings before the Appellate Authority. 10. The object of the provisions of Section 12(1) of the Act is to deny the defaulting tenant the right to contest the application for eviction before the Rent Control Court or to prefer 9 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 an appeal under Section 18 of the Act against any order made by the Rent Control Court on an application made by a landlord under Section 11, unless he pays to the landlord, or deposits with the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority, as the case may be, all arrears of rent admitted by him to be due in respect of the building, up to the date of payment or deposit, and continues to pay or to deposit any rent which may subsequently become due in respect of the building, until the termination of the proceedings before the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority, as the case may be. 11. In **J. Ramkumar v. Ashok Jacob [2022 (1) KHC** **495 : ILR 2021 (4) Kerala 876]** this Court held that Section 12(2) of the Act enjoins a tenant to deposit the admitted rent - under sub section (1), within such time as the court may fix and in such manner as may be prescribed. The time fixed by the court for the deposit of the arrears of rent and the time fixed for the deposit of rent which subsequently accrues due shall not be less than that specified in the proviso to Section 12(2). As per the statutory mandate of Section 12(1), on an application filed by the landlord under Section 12, the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority, as the case may be, has to order payment or 10 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 deposit of arrears of rent admitted by the tenant to be due in respect of the petition schedule building, up to the date of payment or deposit and the tenant shall also be directed to continue to pay or deposit any rent which may subsequently become due in respect of the building, until the termination of the proceedings before the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority, regardless of the relief sought for in that application. As per Section 12(3) of the Act, if any tenant fails to pay or to deposit the rent as aforesaid, the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority, as the case may be, shall, unless the tenant shows sufficient cause to the contrary, stop all further proceedings and make an order directing the tenant to put the landlord in possession of the building. ## 12. In **Gopala Panicker Baiju v. Mallika [2018 (5)** **KHC 95]** the Division Bench of this Court had occasion to deal with a case in which the tenants raised a contention that, no amount was due from them as arrears of rent. That apart, they had spent more than Rs.3,00,000/- for renovation of the building and the landlady is liable to adjust the said amount towards rent. Thus, according to the tenants, no admitted arrears of rent are payable under Section 12(1) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and 11 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 Rent Control) Act. Unless the tenant himself admits in the objection to the petition filed under Section 12 of the Act or in the counter statement filed in the Rent Control Petition that any amount is due to the landlord, as arrears of rent, there cannot be any admitted arrears of rent. In short, the contention was that the simple denial of the tenant would absolve him from the liability to deposit the admitted arrears under Section 12 of the Act. 13. In **Gopala Panicker Baiju [2018 (5) KHC 95]** the Division Bench held that the admitted arrears of rent contemplated under Section 12(1) of the Act need not be admission in the rent control proceedings itself and it cannot be insisted that the acceptance of the arrears or the quantum of admitted arrears of rent should come by the express words from the tenant himself in his counter statement in the Rent Control Petition or in the objection to the application filed under Section 12 of the Act by the landlord. It can be inferred from any document containing admission, as to the rate of rent, and period of default made by the tenant. The relevant factors, from which ‘arrears of rent’, can be inferred are the rate of rent and period of default. Normally, the rent deed executed by the 12 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 tenant is a document which contains admission as to the rate of rent made by the tenant. The periodical enhancement in the rate of rent is evident from the rent receipts, in case the rent deed is not current. Similarly, the rent receipts, postal receipts or bank records, contemplated under Section 9(2) of the Act, produced by the tenant, are the documents which would suggest the period for which rent is paid. According to Section 9(1) of the Act, the tenant is entitled to get a receipt on payment of rent and in case of refusal, an alternative remedy for payment of rent is also provided in Section 9(2) of the Act. Therefore, a tenant cannot be heard to say that the landlord refused to issue a receipt, on payment of rent. The rent receipt is statutorily accepted as substantive evidence from which the period of default can be inferred indirectly. According to Taylor on evidence, admission may be direct or indirect, express or implied. Therefore, rent receipts, money order receipts and other bank records provided under Section 9 of the Act are documents containing admission which would suggest an inference indirectly as to the period of default also. The term ‘admitted arrears of rent’ has to be understood and construed in conformity with statutorily recognised payment only. Therefore, for the 13 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 determination of a petition under Section 12 of the Act, it is permissible to require the production of the rent deed by the landlord and the rent receipt or document mentioned in Section 9(2) of the Act by the tenant. These materials would obviously show the admitted arrears of rent, without conducting any enquiry or adjudication. 14. In **Gopala Panicker Baiju [2018 (5) KHC 95]** the - Division Bench noticed that, any kind of set off or adjustment towards arrears of rent cannot be accepted while considering an application under Section 12 of the Act, as such counter-claims require enquiry and adjudication. Neither Section 11(2)(b) nor - Section 12 of the Act recognises or permits any kind of set off, - adjustment or counter claim by the tenant towards arrears of rent or admitted arrears. The enabling provision which permits set-off towards rent is Section 17(2) of the Act and the same is permissible, where an order to that effect is passed by the Accommodation Controller, on satisfaction of the failure of the landlord to attend maintenance and necessary repairs of the building. 15. In **Gopala Panicker Baiju [2018 (5) KHC 95]** the Division Bench concluded that the admitted arrears is an amount 14 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 that can be quantified by the Rent Control Court from the rent deed produced by the landlord and the receipts or documents specified under Section 9 of the Act, evidencing payment of rent, produced by the tenants unless the rent deed contains anything to the contrary. To sum up, the tenant cannot be allowed to wriggle out from the statutory liability under Section 12 of the Act by a blank denial in his counter statement or objection to the application filed under Section 12 of the Act, where the rent deed and receipts would quantify an amount as admitted arrears of rent, from the admissions therein; but otherwise, the determination empowered with the Rent Control Court contemplated under Section 12(1) of the Act would come to an end, on a bare denial of the tenant and thereby the purpose of Section 12 of the Act itself would be defeated. 16. In the instant case, the reasoning of the Rent Control Court in paragraph 11 of Ext.P12 order dated 07.10.2022 in I.A.No.3 of 2021 in R.C.P.No.55 of 2019 for taking the rate of rent of the leasehold premises, for the purpose of an application filed under Section 12 of the Act, as Rs.3,52,856/- per month reads thus; “11. It is pertinent to note that the respondent has not placed on record any documents showing the 15 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 payment of rent after the filing of the RCP. The respondent has not admitted the monthly rate of rent of Rs.7,05,711/- per month. Since the respondent has not admitted the monthly rent of Rs.7,05,711/- but has admitted Rs.3,52,856/- as monthly rent, he cannot be directed to deposit the monthly rent of Rs.7,05,711/- claimed by the petitioner.” 17. The rate of rent of the leasehold premises for the purpose of an application filed under Section 12 of the Act can be inferred from any document containing the admission of the tenant as to the rate of rent. It can also be inferred from by the express words from the tenant himself in the counter statement filed in the Rent Control Petition or in the objection filed to the application under Section 12 of the Act. It can also be inferred from the admission made on behalf of the tenant in the lawyer notice or reply notice issued by his counsel. Even in the absence of lease deed in respect of the leasehold premises, the rate of rent can be inferred from rent receipts, postal receipts or bank records contemplated under Section 9(2) of the Act. From such receipts or bank records, which are statutorily accepted as substantive evidence, the rate of rent for the purpose of an application under Section 12 of the Act and also the period of default can be inferred indirectly. 16 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 18. A reading of paragraph 3 of Ext.P12 order in I.A.No.3 of 2021 in R.C.P.No.55 of 2019 would show that the only contention of the tenant before the Rent Control Court was that, as the landlord himself admits that the monthly rent for April and May 2020 is Rs.3,52,856/- and the same being duly paid, no further enquiry is necessitated under Section 12 of the Act and hence I.A.No.3 of 2021 is liable to be dismissed. 19. The respondent-tenant has admitted in paragraph 6 of Ext.P2 reply notice dated 14.02.2019 that the monthly rent of the leasehold premises as of that date is Rs.7,05,711/-, which includes Rs.36,769.18/- for the car parking facility. In addition to this, in paragraph 7 of Ext.P4 counter statement filed in R.C.P.No.55 of 2019 and in paragraph 2 of Ext.P8 letter addressed to the landlord, the tenant has admitted the rate of rent as Rs.7,05,711/- per month. In paragraph 2 of Ext.P8 letter addressed to the landlord, the tenant has stated that he has filed R.C.P.No.138 of 2018 before the Rent Control Court, invoking the provisions under Section 5(1) of the Act, for fixing fair rent of the leasehold premises at Rs.70/- per sq.ft., since the monthly rent of Rs.7,05,711/-, which includes Rs.36,769.18/- for the car parking facility, which roughly comes to Rs.182/- per sq.ft., is 17 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 highly excessive. 20. In Ext.P7 reply notice dated 11.06.2020 the landlord has agreed to reduce rent in the rental agreement to 50%, only for April and May 2020. The admissions made by the tenant in paragraph 6 of Ext.P2 reply notice dated 14.02.2019, paragraph 7 of Ext.P4 counter statement filed in R.C.P.No.55 of 2019 and paragraph 2 of Ext.P8 letter addressed to the landlord that the monthly rent of the leasehold premises as of that date is - Rs.7,05,711/ , which includes Rs.36,769.18/- for the car parking facility, lead to an irresistible conclusion that admitted rate of rent of the leasehold premises, for the purpose of Section 12 of the Act, is Rs.7,05,711/- per month. Therefore, the Rent Control Court committed a grave error in taking the rate of rent of the said premises as Rs.3,52,856/- per month. In the result, this original petition is allowed by modifying the rate of rent fixed in Ext.P12 order dated 07.10.2022 in I.A.No.3 of 2021 in RCP No.55 of 2019 as Rs.7,05,711/- instead of Rs.3,52,856/- per month. Consequently, Ext.P18 order dated 31.03.2023 is set aside and I.A.No.3 of 2021 is restored to file and the Rent Control Court (Additional Munsiff–III), Ernakulam is directed to proceed further with the said interlocutory 18 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 application, strictly in accordance with law, taking note of the law laid down by this Court in **J. Ramkumar [2022 (1) KHC 495]** . Both parties are directed to appear before the Rent Control Court, Ernakulam on **08.06.2023** . Sd/- ## **ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE** Sd/- ## **P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE** AV/26/5 19 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 ## **`APPENDIX OF OP (RC) 93/2023`** |**`PETITIONER EXHIBITS:`**|| |---|---| |**`Exhibit P-1`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL NOTICE DATED 22-1-`**| ||**`2019 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE`**| ||**`RESPONDENT`**| |**`Exhibit P-2`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE ISSUED BY THE`**| ||**`RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 14-2-`**| ||**`2019`**| |**`Exhibit P-3`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE RCP 55/2019 FILED BY THE`**| ||**`PETITIONER PENDING BEFORE THE RENT CONTROL`**| ||**`COURT, ERNAKULAM`**| |**`Exhibit P-4`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT FILED BY`**| ||**`THE RESPONDENT IN EXT P-3 DATED 8-10-2019`**| |**`Exhibit P-5`**|**`TRUE COPY OF RCP 138/2018 FILED BY THE`**| ||**`RESPONDENT, PENDING BEFORE THE RENT CONTROL`**| ||**`COURT ERNAKULAM.`**| |**`Exhibit P-6`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE`**| ||**`RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 29-05-`**| ||**`2020`**| |**`Exhibit P-7`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER SENT BY THE`**| ||**`PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT DATED 11-6-`**| ||**`2020`**| |**`Exhibit P-8`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE`**| ||**`RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER WITHOUT`**| ||**`MENTIONING THE DATE`**| |**`Exhibit P-9`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE LEETER ISSUED BY THE`**| ||**`PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT DATED 11-8-`**| ||**`2020`**| |**`Exhibit P-10`**|**`TRUE COPY OF IA 3/2021 IN RCP 55/2019 FILED`**| ||**`BY THE PETITIONER DATED 5-7-2021`**| |**`Exhibit P-10[a]`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BY THE`**| ||**`PETITIONER IN EXT P-10 DATED 5-7-2022`**| 20 OP(RC)No.93 of 2023 |**`Exhibit P-11`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 8-9-2021`**| |---|---| ||**`FILED BY THE RESPONDENT IN EXT P-10`**| |**`Exhibit P-11[a]`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BY THE`**| ||**`RESPONDENT DATED 22-7-2022`**| |**`Exhibit P-12`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE RENT CONTROL`**| ||**`COURT IN IA 3/2021 DATED 7-10-2022`**| |**`Exhibit P-13`**|**`TRUE COPY OF IA 5/2023 FILED BY THE`**| ||**`RESPONDENT BEFORE RENT CONTROL COURT DATED`**| ||**`2-11-2022`**| |**`Exhibit P-14`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER FILED BY THE`**| ||**`PETITIONER IN IA 5/2023`**| |**`Exhibit P-15`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE RENT`**| ||**`CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY IN RCA 55/2019`**| ||**`DATED 13-3-2023`**| |**`Exhibit P-16`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE RENT CONTROL`**| ||**`COURT, ERNAKULAM DATED 20-3-2023 IN`**| ||**`R.C.P.NO.55/2019`**| |**`Exhibit P-17`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BY THE`**| ||**`RESPONDENT DATED 23-3-2023 IN IA NO.3/2021`**| ||**`IN RCP NO.55/2019`**| |**`Exhibit P-18`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE RENT CONTROL`**| ||**`COURT IN RCP 5/2019 DATED 31-3-2023`**| |**`exhibit`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNY OF THE`**| ||**`PETITIONER .`**|