C.H. UNILA Vs. THURUTHIYAKATH MUKUNDAN
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Click here to view full judgement.
A.M.BABU, J. -
(1.) Eviction of tenant was sought under section 11(2)(b) and (3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (for short, the Act). The ground under section 11(2) (b) was withdrawn pending the proceedings. The rent control court allowed eviction under section 11(3). The appellate authority confirmed it. The tenant is in revision.
(2.) The parties are referred to in this order as landlord and tenant or as they are arrayed in the rent control petition.
(3.) The case of the landlord/petitioner is summarised as follows: He has a daughter by name Beena. She is without any job and income. Therefore she has been wanting to start a business in stationary and fancy goods in the petition schedule room. The said room is suitable for conducting such a business. The petitioner has no vacant building in his possession in order to accommodate his daughter. The need is bona fide. The tenant is not depending on the income from her business run in the petition schedule room. She has other sources of income. Suitable buildings are available in the locality for her to shift her business.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.