K.V.DINESHAN Vs. JAYASREE R.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these revision petitions are filed by the tenants. The eviction petitions were filed by the respondents under Sections 11(2)(b), 11(3) and 11(8) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The ground under Section 11(8) of the Act was given up in the course of the proceedings.

(2.) RCP Nos.1/2010 and 2/2010 are the petitions for eviction. The Rent Control Court allowed eviction on the ground of arrears of rent in RCP No.1/2010. As far as RCR No.294/2013 arising from RCP No.2/2010 is concerned, it is seen that the Rent Control Court did not grant an order of eviction and pleas under Sections 11(2)(b) and 11(3) of the Act were rejected. In appeal, the Rent Control Appellate Authority found that the bona fide need is genuine and accordingly, the eviction petition was allowed. As far as RCP No.1/2010 (RCR No.355/2012) is concerned, the Rent Control Court allowed eviction only under Section 11(2)(b) of the Act and petition under Section 11(3) of the Act has been dismissed, which was reversed by the Appellate Authority.

(3.) A reference to the order passed by the Rent Controller will show that the main reason pointed out for denying eviction under Section 11(3) of the Act is that the first among the landladies is residing at Chennai and the second one is studying at Thiruvananthapuram and if that be so, the second one had to start the business in the petition schedule rooms. It is also observed that the first among the sisters has no case that she is returning back to their native place for starting their intended business and there is no evidence to show that the landladies have made any preparation for doing their intended business.