ABDUL KAREEM Vs. HASHIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Under challenge in this revision filed under Section 20 by the tenant is the judgment of the Rent Control Appellate Authority confirming the order of eviction passed against him by the Rent Control Court on the grounds of arrears of rent and subletting. The learned Counsel for the revision petitioner Sri. T.M. Abdul Latheef submitted that the revision petitioner is not seriously aggrieved by the order of eviction passed under Section 11(2) and it will suffice if this Court grants six weeks time to the revision petitioner for getting that order vacated by filing necessary application under, Section 11(2)(c). In view of the above stand, we need be concerned only with the correctness of order of eviction passed under Section 11(4)(i). In fact on 5.2.2009 when this Court considered this case for admission, elaborate submissions were addressed by Sri. T.M. Abdul Latheef before us and we became inclined to issue notice only on the question whether the Rent Control Petition was liable to fail for want of the statutory notice under the proviso to Section 11(4)(i). Even though Sri. Abdul Latheef argued before us on the merits of the allegations regarding sublease, we feel that in view of the order passed by this Court on 5.2.2009, it is sufficient that we consider the question of maintainability of the Rent Control Petition in the context of issuance or otherwise of statutory notice under Section 11(4)(i) proviso.

(2.) Ext.A1 is the notice that is relied on by the landlord for maintaining the R.C.P. On going through Ext. A1 it is clear that the contents therein intimates the tenant of the alleged contravention of the terms of the lease and subletting/transfer of possession of the premises unauthorisedly. It has become evident in the case that Ext.A1 notice was sent by registered post. The statutory authorities have concurrently found that Ext.A1 was addressed correctly to the tenant as the tenant's address shown in Ext.A1 and his address shown in the lease deed is substantially the same.

(3.) The proviso to Section 11(4)(i) reads as follows: