NARAYANA NAMBOODIRI Vs. CHELLAMMA OMAMA AMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A tenant who has lost both before the Appellate Authority and the District Court in revision, in a proceeding under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act 2 of 1965, for short the Act, is the revision petitioner. A building situated in a property having an extent of 30 cents belonged to Bhaskara Pillai (K.G. Bhaskaran). The building situated on the property was taken on lease by the first petitioner herein on a monthly rent of Rs. 40/-, inclusive of current charges, under a rental deed, Ext. A1 dated 27.2.1971, executed by the petitioner in favour of Bhaskaran Pillai. The 2nd petitioner is the son of the 1st petitioner and he is residing in the building along with his father. While so, Bhaskaran Pillai died leaving his young widow the 1st respondent and their minor daughter 2nd respondent. Till the death of Bhaskaran Pillai, the respondents were residing with him in his family house. There was partition in the family of Bhaskaran Pillai and the building in question was allotted to the share of the respondents herein. After the partition, they shifted their residence from the family house of Bhaskaran Pillai to the house of the parents of the 1st respondent. As they have no other building or room to reside and that there was much inconvenience for continuing their residence in the family house of the 1st respondent, they bonafide required the building in question for their own residence. Accordingly a petition was filed by the respondents, under the due provisions of the Act for evicting the petitioners herein.

(2.) THE present petitioners resisted the said petition denying the contention of the respondents that they bonafide required the building for their own occupation. In the counter statement filed by the petitioners it was also inter alia stated that deceased Bhaskaran Pillai had entered into an agreement with the 1st petitioner herein for sake of the entire property including the building for a consideration of Rs. 11,000/- and they had paid Bhaskaran Pillai an amount of Rs. 2,500/- by way of advance. The counter further stated that the 1st petitioner was reserving his right to pursue his remedies based on that agreement in appropriate proceedings before an appropriate forum.

(3.) AN appeal was filed against this order by the respondents herein. The appellate authority after hearing both sides, holding on the basis of the materials on record that the respondents herein (landlord) bonafide required the buildings for their own residence, reversed the order of the Rent Controller and allowed the petition ordering eviction of the petitioners herein.