JOSEPH Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE ERNAKULAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short point that arises for decision in this writ petition is as to whether the view taken by the learned District Judge that the rent Control Appellate Authority, functioning under the provisions of Kerala act 16/1959, has no power to remand a proceeding to the Bent Controller Court, is correct or not.

(2.) THE question arises this way: THE landlord, who is the respondent before me, filed an application under S. 9[3] [a] [i] of the Travancore-Cochin buildings [lease and Rent Control] Order, 1950 for eviction of the tenant, the writ petitioner before me, on the ground that he must get possession of the building in question, as he proposes to have it reconstructed.

(3.) THERE is no controversy that the Act that followed the ordinance namely, the Kerala Buildings [lease and Rent Control] Act, 1959 - Act 16/1959, under the identical provision namely, S. 11 [4] [iv] gives the same right to a landlord to get eviction of a building for reconstruction. But there is a slight difference in the actual wording as contained in the relevant clause in the Act. Whereas under the Ordinance there was also a condition that the landlord should satisfy the court that the building is in a precarious state, that condition or necessity has been deleted in the corresponding provision under the Act namely, clause [iv] of sub-section [4] of S. 11 of kerala Act 16/1959.