ABDUL SALIM Vs. MUGAL THEATRE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The tenant who was sought to be evicted from a shop room and an attached godown by the respondent a firm by name "Mogul Theatres & Padiyans Complex" on the grounds under S. 11(3) and 11(4)(iii) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' for short), is before us in revision under S. 20 of the Act. The respondent would aver that the tenanted premises which have been in the possession of the petitioner since 1983 are required for storing certain machineries and other equipments during demolition of a cinema, viz. "Mogul Theatres" belonging to the landlord situated in the nearby compound and also for storing building materials during the period of construction of a shopping mall and multiplex theatre in the situs after demolition.

(2.) We are not referring to the averments under S. 11(4)(iii) of the Act, as it was found against and the order has become final.

(3.) The revision petitioner resisted the claim contending that there was no landlord-tenant relationship between him and the respondent firm, as the tenanted premises, according to him, was taken on lease by him from "Padiyath Shopping Complex" and not from the respondent "Mogul Theatres & Padiyans Complex." He also denied the need projected on the ground that "Padiyath Shopping Complex" was in possession of several other rooms having more than 5000 sq.ft. to serve the alleged need. According to the revision petitioner, the need alleged is a temporary one which will not fall within the meaning of "need" as contemplated under S. 11(3) of the Act. He also sought for protection under both the provisos to S. 11(3).