ABDUL JALEEL Vs. MOIDEENKUTTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner is the tenant who suffers an order of eviction passed by the Rent Control Court under Sec.11 (3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act ('the Act' for short) which stands confirmed in the appeal filed by him. Thus, concurrent findings of the courts below granting order of eviction under Sec.11 (3) have come up in revision.

(2.) The respondent resisted the claim of eviction under Sec.11(3) contending that the need is not a bona fide one and it is a ruse for eviction only. According to him, the petitioner has other vacant buildings in his possession for starting the said business. Further, he claimed protection under the second provision to Sec.11 (3) of the Act, contending that he is mainly depending on the income from the tenanted premises and no other vacant buildings are available in the locality for his occupation. On the aforesaid pleadings both parties adduced evidence and after considering the evidence on record the courts below concurrently found that the need projected in the petition is bona fide and the respondent is not entitled to protection under the second proviso to Sec.11 (3) of the Act.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner.