JANAKI AND OTHERS Vs. RAJMOHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been filed by the tenants against the order of eviction passed by the Rent Control Court, Palakkad in R.C.P.No.1/2013 and affirmed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Palakkad in R.C.A.No.43/2013.

(2.) The tenancy arrangement was originally between late Sreenivasa Gounder, the father of the respondent herein and late Narayanan, the predecessor-in-interest of the present petitioners. The Rent Control Petition was preferred by the respondent herein under Section 11(3) of the Rent Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 alleging that he requires the petition schedule shop room for the purpose of starting a business in distribution of surgical equipments by his younger son, who has completed graduation. The further assertion in the petition was that he is not in possession of any other suitable shop room for this purpose and that his son is depending upon him for accommodation.

(3.) We notice that the tenants do not really contest this claim made by the landlord on its merits but only asserted that they are entitled to the benefit of second proviso to Section 11(3) of the Act, since they are solely depending on the income derived from the business conducted by them in the petition schedule shop room. They also contended that the landlord is in possession of another vacant shop room and that they cannot be evicted because there are no other vacant premises in the locality, again taking the benefit of the second proviso to Section 11(3) of the Act.