(1.) The revision petitioner is the tenant who suffered an order of eviction passed under section 11(3) and 11(4)(i) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (for short "the Act"), which stands confirmed in appeal. The parties are referred to as in the Rent Control Petition.
(2.) According to the petitioners, the second petitioner has no permanent job or income. He is presently engaged in helping a close relative,who is running a hospital at Sulthan Bathery. The petition schedule building is required for starting a gents' ready-made shop for the second petitioner. The petitioners have no other buildings of their own in their possession for starting the proposed business. The respondent is not conducting any business in the petition schedule building and he has transferred the possession of the petition schedule building to some other persons by name Lincoln Leo Thomas, Shinoj Varghese, Jainee Stanley and Siji Shinoj and now they are conducting business in the petition schedule building, without the consent of the petitioners. Several other vacant buildings are available in the locality for shifting the business from the tenanted premises.
(3.) The respondent resisted the said contention contending that the need is not bona fide and the second petitioner is running a hospital, by name Victory Hospital, along with his relative Dr. Moideen and obtaining substantial income from it. The second petitioner has no experience in conducting ready-made business. They have several landed properties and buildings in different parts of Kalpetta Town and Waynad District. He denied the allegation that he is not conducting business and not depending on the income derived from the tenanted premises. Further, it is admitted that the persons mentioned in the petition are in possession of the tenanted premises; but they are partners of the firm by name Wayanad Engineers. The petition schedule building has not been transferred to any third party as alleged in the Rent Control Petition.