(Judgment of the Court was delivered by K.K.SASIDHARAN,J.) The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants would be satisfied in case an observation is made by this Court that none of the observation contained in the order dated 06.07.2015 in W.P.No.6129 of 2014 would stand in the way of the Rent Controller in deciding the pending original petition in R.C.O.P.No.496 of 2015 on the file of the XV Small Causes Court at Chennai.
2.The learned counsel for the first respondent on the other hand submitted that there is no evidence to prove that the proposed parties are the legal representatives of the deceased second appellant and as such, the relationship should be proved by them before the Rent Controller.
3.The learned Single Judge has made certain observations in the order impugned in this appeal for the purpose of directing the Electricity Board to give service connection to the first respondent on executing a bond. Those observations were made only for the purpose of deciding the writ petition relating to the service connection. Such observation would not stand in the way of the Rent Controller in deciding the pending civil suit or Rent control original petition. Similarly, the order made in C.M.P.No.18909 of 2017 bringing the proposed parties as the appellants also would not stand in the way of the first respondent in her contention with regard to the legal representatives of the deceased second appellant.
4.The intra court appeal is disposed of with the above observation. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.