IBRAYAN Vs. BALAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question involved in this Second Appeal is as to whether it is necessary for a landlord to prove any of the grounds mentioned in s. 11 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act in a suit for eviction filed on the bash of the second proviso to sub-S. (1) S. 11 of the Act, even in cases where the denial of title by the tenant involves forfeiture of the lease within the meaning of clause (g) of S. 111 of the Transfer of Property act. THE decision of this Court in Appukkuttan v. Vasu,1978 K. L. T. 776 does not deal with this aspect of the case. I therefore refer the second appeal for decision by a Division Bench. "

(2.) THE short facts of the case shorn of unnecessary details are: One K. P. Krishnan Nair and 8 others filed a petition for eviction under S. 11 (2), (3) and (4) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control)Act 2 of 1965 against one Ibrayan and 8 others, the appellants in this second appeal, the persons in possession of the plaint schedule building as tenants In the written objections filed before the Rent Control Court the appellants-tenants denied the title of the first petitioner in the petition for eviction K. P. Krishnan Nair and contended that the building belonged to one narayanan Nair. THE Rent Control Court found that the denial of title as bonafide and directed the petitioners to file a suit for eviction before the civil court.

(3.) IT is the above judgment and decree of the lower appellate court that are challenged by the appellants-tenants in this Second appeal. The learned counsel for the appellants contended that the appellants can be evicted from the building only if one or more of the grounds enumerated in S. 11 of the Kerala Act 2 of 1965 are alleged and proved in the case even if the civil court was to try and dispose of the case. According to the learned counsel a tenant of a building to which the provisions of Act 2 of 1965 apply can be evicted only if one of the grounds for eviction mentioned in S. 11 of Act 2 of 1965 has been established in the case and as that has not been done, the judgment and decree for eviction will have to be set aside.