SHAJI Vs. CHATHUKUTTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiffs filed O.S.No.365/2007 on the file of the Additional Sub Court-I, Kozhikode (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from evicting the plaintiffs forcefully. However, the defendants filed O.S.No.696/2008 on the file of the trial court for recovery of the plaint schedule property from the plaintiffs. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their litigious status before the trial court in O.S.No.365/2007.

(2.) The plaint schedule property having an extent of 11.5 cents of land with a three storied shopping complex belonged to a registered partnership firm under the name and style 'M/s.Three Associates', in which Sri.T.Mani, the 2nd plaintiff was a partner along with Sri.T.A.Krishnan and Sri.Kiran Babu as partners. In the year 1997, the 1 st plaintiff approached the partners of the firm seeking to get possession of the shop room as a tenant for conducting a bakery business. The partners of the firm, namely, Sri.T.A.Krishnan and Sri.Kiran Babu had agreed to lease out the plaint schedule shop room to the 1 st plaintiff. The 2nd plaintiff also wanted to include him in the business. Accordingly, on 3/11/1997, Sri.T.A.Krishnan and Sri.Kiran Babu rented out their 2/3rd share over the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiff on a monthly rent of Rs.1,000.00. Thereupon, the 2nd plaintiff obtained licence from the Corporation of Kozhikode for conducting bakery business in the plaint schedule shop room. Earlier, Sri.T.A.Krishnan, Sri.Kiran Babu and the 2nd plaintiff had availed a loan for their partnership business mortgaging the plaint schedule property by way of deposit of title deeds in favour of the Kerala Financial Corporation (for short 'the KFC'). Subsequently, they defaulted in paying the amount in time. Hence, recovery proceeding was initiated by the KFC and the property was brought to sale. The property was purchased by the defendants. Alleging fraud in the matter of sale, several litigations were launched before the courts. Those litigations were dismissed confirming the sale in favour of the defendants. According to the plaintiffs, they have been in possession of the suit property in their personal capacity as tenants in occupation of the shop room for conducting a bakery therein. The suit was filed in the year 2007 seeking to restrain the defendants, who are admittedly auction purchasers, from forcefully evicting the plaintiffs.

(3.) The defendants filed a suit for recovery of possession as O.S.No.696/2008 before the trial court and both the suits were tried together. The main contention of the plaintiffs is that the plaintiffs are entitled to get the benevolent provisions under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (for short 'Act 2 of 1965').