JOSE Vs. KOMALAVALLY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the judgment in R.C.A. No.34 of 1997 of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Thrissur. Original proceeding is R.C.P. No.51 of 1994 of the Rent Control Court, Thrissur. Revision petitioner is the tenant. The facts of the case are as follows:

(2.) Building No.13/296 of Thrissur Municipality was taken on lease by the petitioner on 6.3.1989 for a monthly rent of Rs.450/-from the predecessor of the respondents for a period of one year. The petitioner executed a rent deed on 4.3.1989 in favour of the original landlord. The rental arrangement continued under the same terms and conditions. Allegations are that the tenant kept rent of the room in arrears from February, 1994 and also that the adjacent premises in which the landlord resides with his family was insufficient for their use and that the room occupied by the tenant is bonafide needed for additional accommodation of the landlord and by carrying out necessary repairs and alterations the tenanted premises can be made suitable for the additional accommodation.

(3.) Ext.A2 notice was issued to the tenant. The landlord filed petition under Sections 11 (2) (b), 11 (3) and 11 (8) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The tenant opposed the application by filing objection stating that there was no rent in arrears. The necessity for getting eviction for additional accommodation was also denied by the tenant. It was also contended that the tenanted premises is used as a workshop and it is from the income derived from the workshop that the tenant and his family live and that no other building is available anywhere near the tenanted premises.