LAWS(KER)-2015-10-166

RAMAKRISHNA SUBRAHMANYA KOCHI Vs. VAZHIKKE VEETTIL DAYANANADAN

Decided On October 14, 2015
Ramakrishna Subrahmanya Kochi Appellant
V/S
Vazhikke Veettil Dayananadan Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the tenant in R.C.P. No. 47 of 2014 on the file of the Rent Control Court, Payyannur, a petition for eviction filed by the respondent herein under Ss. 11(2) and 11(4)(v) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, herein after referred to as 'the Act' for short. The respondent herein has, in the petition for eviction filed by him averred that the tenant took the petition schedule building bearing door No. KP X/458 of Karivellur Gramapanchayath on lease as per lease agreement dated 23.4.2010, on a monthly rent of Rs. 7475/ - for the purpose of starting a clinic, that as per the terms of the entrustment, the rent agreed upon was to be paid on the first of every English calender month, that the rent was thereafter enhanced and the rent payable as on the date of the institution of the rent control petition was Rs. 8595/ - per mensem, that the tenant has paid the rent only upto and inclusive of February, 2014 and that the rent is in arrears from March, 2014. The landlord had in the rent control petition which was instituted on 13.6.2014 further averred as follows:

(2.) Shorn of details, the substance of averments in paragraph 4 of R.C.P. No. 47 of 2014 is to the effect that after the entrustment, the tenant has not even opened the room and started the clinic, that he has not paid the electricity charges and consequently, the electricity connection was disconnected. In other words, the contention is to the effect that the tenant has not occupied the room for the purpose for which it was taken on lease.

(3.) Upon receipt of summons, the tenant entered appearance through counsel and filed a counter statement dated 13.10.2014. As regards the allegation that the rent is in arrears from March, 2014, the tenant contended in paragraph 5 of the said counter statement that the landlord did not receive the rent when it was tendered with a view to create a ground for instituting a petition for eviction. He had also averred that he is ready to pay the entire arrears of rent. As regards the averments in paragraph 4 of the rent control petition extracted above, the tenant had in the counter statement averred as follows: