ABBAS Vs. SANKARAN NAMBOODIRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The net was spread wide by a landlord to catch his tenant at least on one of the many grounds set on it. Ultimately the tenant was caught on one ground which was upheld by the authorities under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (for short 'the Act'). Of course that one ground is enough to get an order of eviction. Rent Control Court, and the Appellate Authority found concurrently that the tenant ceased to occupy the building for more than six months without reasonable cause. Revisional authority did not interfere with the finding. Consequently, the tenant now faces threat of imminent eviction. Hence he filed this original petition under Art.227 of the Constitution in challenge of the said order of eviction.

(2.) Tenant was conducting a hotel business in the building. Landlord alleged that the tenant kept the building closed for about one year preceding the date of application. Tenant disputed the allegation and contended that he was conducting business in the building all through. Landlord took out a commission to inspect the shop and the commissioner who went to the place found the shop remaining closed and also observed certain features such as spider webs and collection of dust on some portion of the room. Commissioner, on those features, reported that no human activity would have been carried on in the room at least for some months.

(3.) Landlord got himself examined as a witness besides examining one neighbouring shop-keeper. Both of them testified that the room remained closed for a long time, more than the period envisaged in S.11(4)(v) of the Act. Tenant and one witness said that hotel business was being conducted in the shop room even till the previous evening of Commissioner's visit. Rent Control Court as well as Appellate Authority believed the evidence of the landlord and declined to believe the evidence adduced by the tenant.