PALATTUTHARAYIL NABEESU Vs. CHEMBRA RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The tenant in R.C.P No.37 of 2012 of Rent Control Court, Ponnani has filed this revision against the concurrent verdicts of the said court and the Rent Control Appellate Authority (Additional District Judge-III), Manjeri, directing the eviction of the tenant from the petition scheduled building, on the ground of arrears of rent envisaged under Sec. 11(2)(b) and bona fide need of the landlord envisaged under Sec. 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (for short 'the Act')

(2.) The petition scheduled building is said to have been leased out to the revision petitioner on 11/2/2012, for a monthly rent of Rs.3,000.00. The respondent would contend that the petitioner committed default of payment of rent from May, 2012 onwards. According to the respondent, he is presently residing at his wife's house, and hence, he bona fidely requires the petition scheduled building for his own occupation. It is stated by the respondent that the revision petitioner did not care to make payment of the arrears of rent and to vacate the leasehold premises despite receipt of notice sent by the petitioner. With the above contentions, the respondent had approached the learned Rent Controller for the eviction of the revision petitioner from the petition scheduled building on the grounds envisaged under Ss. 11(2)(b) and 11(3) of the Act.

(3.) The revision petitioner, on appearance before the Rent Controller, denied the landlord-tenant relationship with the respondent and put forward a contention that the property inclusive of the petition scheduled building originally belonged to her and her children and that the said property happened to be registered in the name of a person, by name, Shanmughan, as security, while availing a loan of Rs.10.00 lakhs from the said person. The abovesaid Shanmughan is alleged to have obtained several signed stamp papers from the revision petitioner at the time of the above loan transaction. Thus, it is alleged that the present proceedings towards the eviction of the revision petitioner, were initiated by the respondent in collusion with the abovesaid Shanmughan.