THOMAS Vs. KUNJI THOMMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The landlords applied, under S.11(3) of Act 2/65, for evicting two tenants occupying adjacent shop rooms, for starting a business in cold storage. Vacant possession of one room was obtained through court, in RCOP 11/70, on 6-4-79; and possession of the other was obtained on 18-6-79. On 1-8-79 the tenant in O. P. No. 11/70 applied for restoration under S.11(12) The landlords resisted the application. Their case was that cold storage business had become unattractive in the meanwhile, that they had decided to start a business in hardwares instead using both the rooms, and that because of the intervention of the rainy season, necessary repairs and improvements could not be completed in time. They had thus "reasonable cause" within the meaning of the sub-section. The Rent Control Court, the appellate authority and the revisional court overruled this case and ordered restoration. The landlords have now come in revision under S.115 CPC.

(2.) Sub-s.(12) and (13) of S.11 of Act 2/65 read as follows:

(3.) Under sub-s.(12), the landlords bad to occupy the room within one month; and admittedly they had not done so even if this period were to be computed from 18-6-79 when alone the second room had fallen vacant. The defence was "reasonable cause" and the Rent Control Court noticed the following facts and circumstances to overrule the plea: