P.M.JOSEPH Vs. P.C.SURESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The tenant-respondent in RC(OP) No.4/2014, on the file of the Rent Control Court, Ettumanoor, has filed this revision aggrieved by the judgment of the Rent Control Appellate Authority-IV, Kottayam, dismissing the appeal, RCA No.40/2016, that challenged the order of eviction under Ss. 11(2) (b), 11(3) and 11(8) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (for short, 'Act').

(2.) The respondents/landlords, contended that the petition scheduled shop room was obtained by them by virtue of sale deed No.1514/2011 of Ettumanoor SRO. The tenant took the petition scheduled room on lease from its prior owner, wherein he is conducting a flower business. The room on the southern side of the petition scheduled room was taken on rent by the father of the landlords from the previous owners and was conducting a jewellery business therein. While so, the landlords herein purchased the entire building including the petition schedule room from its owners. It was contended that the rent at the rate of Rs.1,800.00 per month had been paid upto April 2011 and the tenant defaulted on payment of the rent from May 2011.

(3.) The landlords also contended that the room where they are conducting the jewellery business, is inconvenient and not having sufficient space to display the ornaments and accommodate the customers and if the petition schedule room is also obtained, both can be joined together, which will provide sufficient and necessary space for running the jewellery business conveniently and profitably. It was also their contention that the tenant is hardly conducting any business in the petition schedule room.