LOUIS PACHAN Vs. JANAKI AMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an original petition filed under Art.227 of the Constitution of India by an unsuccessful tenant for a writ of certiorari to quash Exts. P3, P4 and P6. Petitioner is the tenant of two rooms Nos. 13 and 14 in building Nos. 241 and 242 in Ward No. 1 covered by Sy. No. 142/1 of Guruvayur Township. He took one room on rent in the year 1954 and another room in 1959. Originally Madhavi Amma was the landlady and after her death, her daughter became the lessor. R.C.O.P. No. 47/79 was filed for eviction of the petitioner, that is a litigation which continued till the filing of the present original petition. Eviction petition was filed on the ground that the landlady requires these two rooms for installation of the generator for running the Cinema Hall 'Sreekrishna Theatre'. As the landlady could not obtain possession of the tenanted premises, she had to install the generator in a temporary shed and that entailed a series of litigations with the township authorities, etc. Ultimately eviction orders have been obtained by the landlady/lessor and they are confirmed.

(2.) In this petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner/tenant contends that by virtue of subsequent events and the landlady obtaining Ext. P7 order from the Guruvayur Township Committee the reason for the eviction petition vanishes and hence Exts. P3, P4 and P6 are liable to be quashed and the tenant is entitled to continue in occupation in the tenanted premises. Ext P7 was issued in 1990.

(3.) On behalf of the respondents Shri. Ananthakrishna Iyer contends that the commissioner who visited the premises has filed a detailed report with a sketch. This clearly shows that by installing the generator in a temporary shed which is behind the auditorium, the landlady faced several difficulties and that the present petitioner has his own accommodation very near to the tenanted premises and hence the eviction orders which have been confirmed should not be interfered with. Shri. Iyer also contends that in proceedings under Art.227 of the Constitution and Art.226 of the Constitution, the court is exercising only judicial review and it cannot go into the questions of fact.