JOSE Vs. THOMAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE Civil Revision Petitions arise out of Rent Control petitions filed by the respondent herein for eviction of the tenants from the respective petition scheduled premises under Ss. 11 (2) and 11 (4) (iv) of the kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act 1965, which is hereinafter referred to as the 'act' for short. All the Rent Control Petitions were tried jointly and a common judgment was rendered by the Rent Control Court allowing eviction both under S. 11 (2) and S. 11 (4) (iv) of the Act. The appeals filed by the respective tenants were dismissed by the Rent Control appellate Authority confirming the orders passed by the Rent Control Court . THESE revision petitions have been filed by the respective tenants.

(2.) BOTH the Rent Control Court and the appellate Authority found that the tenants have committed default in payment of rent and that the building needs reconstruction and the landlord bona fide required to reconstruct the same. In view of the concurrent findings of the authorities below, the counsel for the petitioners strained very much to convince us that the findings of the courts below are not supported by any legal evidence, but we are satisfied that the above findings are supported by evidence and that the orders do not suffer from any infirmity. We, therefore, affirm the said findings.

(3.) SHRI. M. V. Joseph, who appeared for the landlord, on the other hand, contended that this ground has not been raised by the landlord before the appellate Authority, and in the circumstances, the petitioners should not be permitted to raise such a contention for the first time in revision. He also submitted that against the order passed by the Commissioner, the landlord has filed an original petition and this court has stayed the operation of the impugned order. The stay granted by this court will not enable the landlord to start the construction as there is no current licence issued by the Municipal Commissioner to start construction.