THANKAPPAN Vs. REJI XAVIER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On a petition filed by the respondent before the Rent Control Court under S.11(2)(b), 11(3) and 11(4)(ii) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (hereinafter Act), the Rent Control Authority allowed the petition of the respondent under S.11(2)(b) and 11(4)(ii) of the Act, while rejecting the petition under S.11(3). On an appeal by the petitioner the Appellate Authority confirmed the findings of the rent controller. Hence this revision before this Court.

(2.) The petitioner contended before us that the arrears of rent having already been paid only the question under S.11(4)(ii) survives for a consideration for this Court.

(3.) According to the petitioner he has not used the building in such a manner as to destroy or reduce its value or utility materially and permanently and hence the prayer of the respondent under S.11(4)(ii) of the Act has to be rejected. The main allegation of the respondent is that the ceiling was dismantled and removed by the petitioner. By no stretch of imagination it can be said that the dismantling and removal of a ceiling will not attract S.11(4)(ii) of the Act. The value of the building is not only reduced but also its utility materially and permanently by the act of dismantling and removal of the ceiling. We are firmly of the view that the act of the petitioner certainly attracts S.11(4) (ii) of the Act.