JOY JOSEPH Vs. SUBRAMANYA IYYER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The tenants who suffered a common order of eviction under Sec. 11 (8) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 ('the Rent Control Act', for short) challenge the concurrent findings of the Rent Control Court and the Rent Control Appellate Authority, by invoking the revisional jurisdiction of this court.

(2.) The landlords filed six separate eviction petitions before the Rent Control Court against the tenants occupying different shop rooms in a building owned by them, contending that they require the vacant possession of all the six tenanted shop rooms for stocking materials which are being used for their perfumery business. The landlords contended that they occupy a part of the building, but they need the ground floor of the building itself for storing the materials. Eviction was also sought against some of the tenants (the respondents in R.C.P.No.48/2015 & 50/2015) under Sec. 11(4)(i) of the Rent Control Act, on the ground of sub-letting.

(3.) The claim for eviction on the ground of bona fide need for additional accommodation was resisted by the tenants. According to them, landlords have no bona fides in making the said claim as they have enough vacant space in the very same building for accommodating the projected need. It is also contended by them that the hardship which may be caused to the tenants by granting the eviction order will outweigh the advantage of the landlords, as there are no vacant rooms in that locality to shift their business.