INDIAN SAREE HOUSE Vs. G RADHALAKSHMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Revision petitioners- tenants challenge the concurrent findings of the Rent Control Court and the Appellate Authority under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').

(2.) The petition schedule building is a part of a larger building. In a major portion of the main building facing Broadway, Ernakulam, a hotel under the name and style "Bharat Coffee House" is being run by Gopalakrishna Rao, husband of the first petitioner in the Rent Control Petition. (The parties are referred as in the Rent Control Petition). On either side of the entrance to Bharat Coffee house, a telephone booth and milk booth are being run by petitioners 4 and 5, the daughters-in-law of Gopalakrishna Rao. Petitioners 2 and 3 are the sons of Gopalakrishna Rao. In the petition schedule building, a textile shop under the name and style "Indian Saree House" is being run by the tenants.

(3.) The Rent Control Petition was filed under Section 11(2)(b), 11(3), ll(4)(i), ll(4)(ii) and 11(8) of the Act. The Rent Control Petition was allowed only under Section 11(3). The ground under Section 11 (8) was apparently not pressed by the landlord at the time of hearing. It is seen recorded in the order of the Rent Control Court that at the time of arguments, the landlord submitted that "they are pursuing the remedy under Section 11(3) only". The other grounds were found against the landlords. Challenging the order of the Rent Control Court, the landlords as well as tenants filed Appeals before the Appellate Authority. The Appeals were dismissed. The appellate judgment is challenged only by the tenants.