AYISA UMMA Vs. GOPALAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revision petitioner / landlady was the respondent before the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Kalpetta in RCA No. 3 of 1989. The matter arises under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The eviction petition filed by her had been allowed, on the grounds of arrears of rent and objectionable subletting by the tenant, but it came to be reversed in appeal.

(2.) The scheduled items which were shop rooms at Sulthan Bathery had been entrusted on lease to the respondent on 20.8.1961. The petitioner / land lord alleged in the RCP that on 4.9.1986 while the tenant was attempting to hand over a portion (of the holding) to a third party her son had intervened and objected. Alterations also had been made to the shop room, according to her, by partitioning. She had further stated that she had issued a notice on 6.9.1986 terminating the tenancy by 20.10.1986 and had also filed a suit on 8.9.1986 as O. S. No. 438 of 1986 praying for an injunction. It had also been stated that during the above happenings the property had been given on sub lease and this was done with an intention to over reach the court orders. An injunction order had been passed in the suit and the relief sought for in the RCP inter alia was to give her vacant possession.

(3.) In the counter statement filed on 22.9.1987, the respondent had denied the allegations raised in the petition. He had disputed the arrears claimed; and denied having made material alterations. He also denied having given any sub lease and further had averred that since the petitioner had several buildings in the town, there was no requirement for her for the rooms.