IRVIN JOHN JAYARAJAN Vs. MADHAVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The tenant in a proceedings for eviction under Ss. 11(2)(b) and 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (the Act), is the petitioner in this revision petition instituted under Sec. 20 of the Act. The respondents are the landlords in the proceedings.

(2.) The subject matter of the proceedings is a residential premises belonging to the landlords which was let out to the tenant. The eviction of the tenant was sought under the provisions aforesaid alleging that the rent of the premises is in arrears from February 1993 and that the premises is required for the residence of the fifth petitioner, Hariram and his family who is residing in the family house of the landlords with others. The tenant objected the claim of the landlords for eviction under Sec. 11 (3) of the Act on the ground that Hariram and his family own a separate building for their residence and the claim is therefore not bona fide. The Rent Control Court accepted the claim of the landlords holding that the rent of the premises is in arrears since February 1993 and that Hariram and his family need bona fide the premises for their residence. Consequently, the petition for eviction was allowed both under Ss. 11(2)(b) as also 11(3) of the Act. In the matter of accepting the claim under Sec. 11 (3) of the Act, the Rent Control Court found that the tenant has not established that Hariram and his family own any other building which could be used for their residence. In appeal, the Appellate Authority affirmed the decision of the Rent Control Court.

(3.) The decision of the Appellate Authority was however challenged by the tenant before this Court in R.C.R. No.538 of 2005 mainly on grounds that there is no arrears of rent inasmuch as he has already deposited the arrears and that I.A.No.1761 of 1998 filed by him before the Appellate Authority to accept in evidence the certified copy of the property tax assessment register in respect of a building owned by Hariram has been improperly rejected by the Appellate Authority.