THOTTUNGAL VELAYUDHAN Vs. SECRETARY YOUTH CONGRESS OFFICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the judgment in R.C.A. No. 82 of 1989 of the District Court, Kozhikode. Landlord is the revision petitioner. Petition for eviction was filed under S.11(2)(b), 11(3) and 11(4)(i) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The section which survives for consideration is S.11(4)(i) of the Act.

(2.) According to the landlord - petitioner, he purchased the petition schedule building as per Ext.A1. The first respondent in the Rent Control Petition Andikutty was the tenant of the building, who got tenancy from the previous landlord. After the petitioner purchased the building, the petitioner became the landlord. The case regarding sublease is as follows:

(3.) According to the petitioner, the second respondent is in occupation of the room. The first respondent subleased the building without any authorisation or consent. Hence, the ground S.11(4)(i) of the Act was made. The first respondent filed objection. In the objection, it is stated that he is the tenant of the building. So far as the second respondent is concerned, he submitted that he is in possession of the building even before the purchase of the property by the petitioner, he continued to be in possession. According to the second respondent, it is the tenant of the building. Even if it is not accepted, according to the second respondent, the long possession of the second respondent shows that it has been recognised by the landlord as tenant. It is with these pleadings that the matter went to trial. In the trial stage, witnesses were examined on behalf of the petitioner and documents were also marked.