K.P. SAJEER Vs. NISAR K.C.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As these revision petitions impugn the common judgment of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, they are taken up for consideration together and disposed by this common order.

(2.) The tenants of a two storied building known as "Kanak complex" within the limits of Thalassery Municipality, are the petitioners in these revision petitions. They are aggrieved by the judgment of the Rent Control Appellate Court that dismissed their appeals against the order of the Rent Control Court that directed their eviction from the tenanted premises in Rent Control Petitions preferred by the respondent landlords under Ss. 11(2), 11(3) and 11(4)(ii) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 [hereinafter referred to as the "Act"].

(3.) In the Revision Petitions before us, the petitioners tenants impugn the judgment of the Appellate Court only to the extent it upholds the eviction ordered by the Rent Control Court under Sec. 11(3) of the Act. In other words, the petitioners are not impugning the finding of the court below under Sec. 11(2) of the Act. The finding of the court below under Sec. 11(3) is assailed inter alia on the contention that the need of the 1st petitioner in the Rent Control Petitions was never established through his examination before the Rent Control Court. It is further contented that the revision petitioners had clearly established that the income from the business conducted in the tenanted premises was their sole source of livelihood, and further, there was no suitable building available in the locality for conducting a lodging house of the kind that they were conducting in the tenanted premises. The petitioners therefore argued that they had discharged the burden required of them under the 2nd proviso to Sec. 11(3), and despite that the court below ordered their eviction from the tenanted premises by finding in favour of the landlords. 3. We have heard Sri.R.Surendran, the learned counsel for the revision petitioners and Sri.Ashwin Sathyanath, the learned counsel for the respondents.