NAGARAJA RAO Vs. C K MAMAD KEYI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is brought by special leave from the judgment of the Kerala High Court dated August 2, 1967 in Writ Appeal No. 13 of 1966 setting aside the judgment of the Single Judge of the same High Court in O. P. No. 1992 of 1964.

(2.) The property described in the schedule to the lease deed Ex. A-1 was led by respondent No. 1 to deceased K.K. Subba Rao father of appellants Nos. 1 to 3 and respondent Nos. 8 and 9 and husband of respondent No. 10. The lease deed dated February 26, 1944 was for a term of six years. The lessee had to pay pattam of Rs. 75/- for taking the usufruct and rent of Rs. 100/- for the building. The lessee had to expend Rs. 25/- out of the above amount for the repairs of the house and for maintenance of the compound every year. The balance of Rs. 150/- was to be paid in monthly. instalments of Rs. 12.50. The respondent alleged that the appellants had sublet separate portions of the building. Respondent No. 1, therefore, filed a petition, under Section 11(4)(1)(iii) of the kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control Act) Act 16 of 1959 against the appellants and respondent Nos. 8 to 10 for ordering them to surrender possession of the buildings alone but the lease embraced the buildings and the paramba (compound) and that the petition to evict the evict the buildings alone on the strength of the lease is not maintainable. The Munsiff held that the subletting had occurred and respondent No. 1 was entitled to claim eviction. The appellants preferred Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 45 of 1962 in the court of Subordinate Judge, Tellicherry who dismissed the appeal. The appellants thereupon filed Civil Revision Petition No. 20 of 1963 in the Court of District Judge, Tellicherry who by his judgment dated July 1, 1964 allowed the revision petition holding that Ex. A-1 represented a composite lease of the buildings and also of the trees and the provisions of Act 16 of 1959 were not applicable. Thereupon respondents 1 to 6 filed writ petition No. 1922 of 1964 under Article 226 of the Constitution in the kerala High Court. By his judgment dated August 27, 1965. K.K. Mathew J., dismissed the writ petition. Respondents 1 to 6 filed writ appeal No. 13 of 1966 in the High Court and this writ appeal was allowed by the Division Bench consisting of the Chief Justice and Velu Pillai J., and the order of the Rent Control Court granting eviction as restored.

(3.) The sole question involved in this appeal is whether the lease Ex. A-1 is a composite lease in respect of the land and the building thereon or whether it contains two independent transactions, one in respect of the building in question and the other for the remaining properties and the trees.