AVANASALINGAM CHETTIAR Vs. CHUNILAL SAMJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short point that arises for consideration in this Civil Revision Petition by the Petitioner -landlord in a petition for eviction under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act 2 of 1965, is whether he is entitled to be put in possession of the building if he has no definite and consistent case that he bona fide needs the building for his own occupation or for the occupation of any member of his family.

(2.) THE Petitioner applied to the Rent Control Court for eviction of the Respondent -tenant from the building in his occupation, under Section 11(3) of Kerala Act 2 of 1965. The specific averment in the petition for eviction was:

(3.) THE Petitioner filed an appeal against the order of the Rent Control Court dismissing his petition for eviction. But the Appellate Authority dismissed that appeal and confirmed the order of the Rent Control Court. In the judgment the Appellate Authority said: The Rent Control Court was not right in observing that the Petitioner has no specific case. The petition itself contains clear averments that the need is that of the Petitioner's son. That is what has been spoken to by him at the time of evidence. There is no evidence at all on record to show that the person on whose behalf eviction is sought really requires the building for his purpose. The Rent Control Court has rightly denied relief to the Petitioner and that finding does not require any interference. There is no waiver on the part of the Petitioner -landlord. No notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act is necessary for maintaining a petition for eviction under Section 11 of Kerala Act 2 of 1965.