KALANGOTTA PRADEEPAN Vs. THIYADETH ABOOBACKER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AN order of eviction passed by both the authorities under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 is under challenge in this revision.

(2.) WE heard the learned counsel for the petitioner Sri.K.C.Santhosh Kumar. Even though notice has been served on the respondent, there is no appearance. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly pleaded that the approach made by the authorities below is not correct and evidently erroneous. We were taken through the orders passed by both the authorities.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the revision petitioner contended that even at the time of filing the RCP, one room in the ground floor was in the possession of the landlord and therefore, going by the first proviso to Section 11(3), the landlord will not be entitled for getting eviction of the petition schedule building. According to the tenant, the son of the landlord is doing hotel business there. The Rent Control Court in paragraph-10 of the order discussed the above and found that the name of the hotel noted by the Commissioner is Aiswarya and in the normal case, the landlord being a Muslim will not use the said name. It was held that the contention put forward by the tenant is not sustainable.