BOBINS JOHNY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, landlord of the building bearing Nos. 14/467-B and 14/467-A in Thrissur District, has filed this writ petition challenging Exhibit P8 order dtd. 21/1/2023 passed by the Accomodation Controller - Tahsildar, under Sec. 13(3) of the Kerala Building (Lease & Rent) Control Act, 1965 ('Act, 1965' for short). Apparently, aggrieved by the order, petitioner/landlord has preferred an appeal before the District Collector -appellate authority, under Sec. 13(6) of the Act, 1965.

(2.) Even though various contentions are raised with respect to the illegality of Exhibit P8 order passed by the Tahsildar, in my considered opinion, when the Act, 1965 prescribes a statutory modality to deal with an order passed by the Accommodation Controller, the petitioner has definitely to resort to the said provision.

(3.) The case projected by the petitioner attacking the impugned order of the Accommodation Controller is that the petitioner landlord has not interfered with any amenities provided or enjoyed by the tenant and the Accommodation Controller has not taken into consideration the said aspect, especially due to the fact that the contention put forth by the tenants-respondent Nos. 4 and 5 is that due to the advertisement board kept in the parking area of the complex, their amenities are cut off, and therefore, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner Sri. Varghese C. Kuriakose, the Accommodation Controller ought to have found that the landlord did not cut off or withheld any of the amenities enjoyed by the tenant.