KUNJU T P Vs. FATHIMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The tenant, in a proceedings under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for short), is the petitioner in this Rent Control Revision. The decision, by which, the Appellate Authority under the Act, confirmed an order of eviction is impugned in this Revision. The subject-matter of the proceedings is a shop room. Eviction was sought by the landlords under Section 11(3) of the Act, alleging that the third petitioner needs the shop room to start a footwear and fancy store, by utilising the said room with the adjoining shop room, which is in the occupation of another tenant.

(2.) The tenant contested the petition for eviction, contending, inter alia, that the need projected for eviction is not a bona fide one and that the landlords have other buildings and rooms in their possession, where the third petitioner can start the proposed business. According to the tenant, the landlords are running a Tourist Home in a building, situated near the petition schedule room; that the hall on the ground floor of the said building is lying vacant and that the same can be converted and used by them for the need of the third petitioner. It was also contended by the tenant that the availability of the said vacant premises was not pleaded by the landlords in the petition for eviction and therefore, the petition for eviction was liable to be dismissed on that ground also.

(3.) During the pendency of the proceedings before the Rent Control Court, the tenant in the adjoining room has vacated the premises and the landlords have come into possession of the said room.