LAWS(KER)-2001-6-5

GEORGE JOSEPH Vs. KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION

Decided On June 28, 2001
GEORGE JOSEPH Appellant
V/S
KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners claim to be tenants of the third respondent, and the Writ Petition has been filed challenging Ext. P1 and similar notices issued by the first respondent Kerala Financial Corporation (KFC for short). There is also a prayer for a declaration that the petitioner being tenants of the shop rooms of the third respondent, are entitled to continue their occupation until such time they are evicted through methods authorised by the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (for short, Rent Control Act) at the instance of the landlord.

(2.) According to the petitioners, the tenancy arrangement commenced in 1985 to 1992 period, in respect of the premises situated in the Changanacherry Municipality. The sequence of events, including the background in which Ext. P1 was served, are given by the petitioner in Para.3 of the O. P. which could be extracted hereunder:

(3.) The operation of Ext. P1 has been stayed by interim orders. The Income Tax Department had also initiated recovery steps, and the officer is respondent No. 4, but in view of the payments made, they are no more interested in the present adjudication. The third respondent landlord had filed two affidavits and she had pointed out that because of the pendency of the Original Petition her liabilities were mounting up in lakhs, as steps for disposing of the properties alone would have come to her rescue from the debt trap. The outstanding are above Rs. 85 lakhs. She wanted an early hearing, and also a direction to be issued to the petitioners in the Original Petition to pay the rent directly to the KFC. Her stand on the merit was that the Original Petition was misconceived, for that petitioners were given licence to occupy the building for 11 months, well before Ext. P1, and their occupation after the term was as statutory tenants, and especially after Ext. P1 the petitioners could not claim protection of the Rent Control Act, and the KFC was bound and obliged to take up follow up steps by resorting to the procedure prescribed by the Kerala Public Buildings (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1968.