RAMANKUTTY Vs. ITTIACHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent No. 1 before the Rent Controller, namely, the tenant, is the petitioner before me.

(2.) The landlord filed an application for eviction of the first respondent from the premises on two grounds, namely, (1) that the landlord requires the premises bona fide for his own occupation and (2) that the tenant, the first respondent, has sublet the premises to respondents 2 and 3 before the Bent Controller.

(3.) The plea set up by the tenant, namely, the first respondent, was that respondents 2 and 3 are only his servants and that the coffee hotel that is being run in the premises belongs to the first respondent himself. So far as the question of bona fide claim by the landlord, that again was challenged by the first respondent.