Listing Not Updated On E-Courts Platform | Kerala High Court Directs Consideration Of Restoration Plea After Dismissal For Non-Appearance
Sanchayita Lahkar
The High Court of Kerala Division Bench of Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Johnson John set aside the dismissal of a restoration application filed by a tenant concerning an earlier dismissed rent control appeal. The Court directed the Rent Control Appellate Authority to consider the restoration application on its merits after hearing both parties. Further, it ordered that execution proceedings already initiated be kept on hold and clarified that any delivery effected shall remain subject to the final outcome of the pending proceedings.
The matter originated from a rent control petition filed by a trust, seeking eviction of a tenant from a premises located at Mannanthala, Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner in the current proceedings, the tenant, had initially contested the eviction order passed by the Rent Control Court in R.C.P No. 62 of 2019. The Rent Control Court allowed the petition and ordered eviction on 22.07.2022.
Subsequently, the tenant filed R.C.A No. 25 of 2022 before the Additional District and Sessions Court V, Thiruvananthapuram, functioning as the Rent Control Appellate Authority. Alongside the appeal, he also submitted a stay petition (I.A. No. 1/2022), seeking to halt execution of the eviction order.
During the pendency of the appeal, the tenant failed to appear on multiple posting dates—namely 03.03.2025, 06.03.2025, and 07.03.2025—resulting in the dismissal of the appeal for non-representation on 07.03.2025. The tenant then filed a restoration application (I.A. No. 3/2025), coupled with a delay condonation petition (I.A. No. 4/2025), requesting the court to revive the appeal proceedings.
However, the restoration application also met the same fate—it was dismissed for default due to absence of the tenant’s counsel. According to the tenant, his absence on the aforementioned dates was attributable to the failure of the e-Courts portal to update the correct posting information. Alleging a lapse on the part of the judicial administrative machinery, the tenant submitted that he was unaware of the exact dates due to lack of system-generated updates.
In view of these claims, the High Court, while admitting the original petition, called for remarks from the Rent Control Appellate Authority and the Director of IT to examine the allegation of non-updation of the e-Courts platform. A report was subsequently filed, shedding light on administrative oversights.
The report confirmed that the restoration application had indeed been updated in the Case Information System Software. However, due to the Bench Clerk being on leave, the alternate staff failed to enter the advanced posting information, inadvertently causing a lack of visibility regarding the scheduled hearing dates. It was also reported that the next posting dates had been pronounced in open court and duly entered in the court’s 'A' Diary.
Notwithstanding these entries, the failure to update the online system led to a situation where the tenant’s counsel was not present during critical hearings, thereby leading to the dismissal of the restoration plea.
It was in this context that the High Court was approached under O.P (RC) No. 93 of 2025, seeking relief against the consequential outcomes flowing from the procedural lapses.
The Court, after considering the administrative report and attendant facts, made the following observations:
“The petitioner submits that the Rent Control Appeal filed by him was dismissed due to non-representation. It is stated that the case was adjourned on 03.03.2025, 06.03.2025, and lastly on 07.03.2025. On all these occasions, the petitioner’s counsel was absent, allegedly due to the lack of updation on the e-Courts website regarding the posting of the case.”
The Court further recorded:
“The report indicates that there was a mistake on the part of the Bench Clerk in updating the website. It is appropriate to refer to the following paragraph of the report: ‘In this context, I would like to submit that the RCA was not pending. The interlocutory application for restoration of RCA was updated in the Case Information System Software. But when it was advanced based on the petition filed by the petitioner/tenant, it was omitted to update as Bench Clerk was on leave and the staff in charge of Bench Clerk omitted updating it on the Case Information System Software due to oversight.’”
The report recorded that the next posting dates had been pronounced in open court and duly entered in the ‘A’ Diary maintained by the Court. Upon noticing the omission in the Case Information System Software, the concerned officer stated that staff members had been cautioned against repeating such oversights, and the necessary updates had since been made in the software.
Based on this, the Court concluded:“In the light of the report as above, we are of the view that the dismissal of the restoration application has to be set aside, and it is restored.”
The Court set aside the dismissal of the restoration application and restored it, directing the Rent Control Appellate Authority to consider the restoration application on its merits after hearing both sides. It instructed both parties to appear before the Rent Control Appellate Authority on 30.06.2025 at 10.30 am.
The Court stated that the delivery already effected would be subject to the outcome of the proceedings now pending before the Rent Control Appellate Authority.
It further ordered that the execution proceedings be kept on hold until the conclusion of the proceedings before the Rent Control Appellate Authority. The original petition was disposed of accordingly.
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioners: Sri. S. Mohammed Al Rafi, Smt. Thajuna Maria Francis
For the Respondents: Shri. Rahul Krishnan U.S., Shri. Kiran Krishna, Shri. Siddique Sulaiman
Case Title: Suresh v. Sree Narayana Smaraka Samathi Trust
Neutral Citation: 2025:KER:42879
Case Number: O.P. (RC) No. 93 of 2025
Bench: Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque, Justice Johnson John
[Read/Download order]
