MAHESH BABU Vs. KUTTIYIL MEETHAL MOIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent filed R. C. P. 7/2014 seeking an order of eviction under S.11(4)(iii) and S.11(4)(v) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rend Control) Act (for short, the Act) against the revision petitioner herein. Subsequently he has given up the claim under S.11(4)(iii) and the Rent Control Court proceeded with the claim under S.11(4)(v) only. The parties are referred to as in the Rent Control Petition. The Rent Control Court passed an order dismissing the Rent Control Petition on a finding that the petitioner failed to discharge initial burden of proof under S.11(4)(v) of the Act. In appeal, the appellate authority revised the said finding and allowed the appeal on a finding that the petitioner had successfully proved the cessation of occupation for more than six months and thereby discharged his initial burden; but the respondent failed to rebut the evidence adduced by the petitioner. Thus the legality and propriety of the divergent findings under S.11(4)(v) have come in revision.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.

(3.) The landlord - tenant relationship was not disputed. According to the petitioner, the tenanted premises was given to the respondent for conducting a textile business and he had been conducting the said business. But, subsequently he ceased to occupy the petition schedule building for more than one year and thereby he is entitled to get an order of eviction under S.11(4)(v) of the Act.