IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2010 / 3RD ASHADHA 1932 RCRev..No. 147 of 2010 (D) ------------------------------- RCA.19/08 OF ADDL. RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, ALAPPUZHA. RCP.71/04 OF THE RENT CONTROL COURT, ALAPPUZHA. ----------------------------- REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/COUNTER PETITIONER: ----------------------------------------------------------------- S.MANILAL, S/O.LATE SREEDHARAN, PROPRIETOR, SREEDHAR RESTAURANT, NORTH OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN HOSPITAL, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/ PETITIONERS: ----------------------------------------------------- 1. CHINNAMMA CHERIAN, W/O.LATE CHRIAN, RESIDING AT THEVARKADU HOUSE, BEACH P.O., BAZAAR, ALAPPUZHA-12. 2. ALEX CHERIAN, S/O.LATE CHERIAN, OF DO. DO. 3. DOMINIC CHERIAN, S/O.LATE CHERIAN, OF DO. DO. THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ R. C. R. No.147 of 2010 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 24th day of June, 2010 ORDER Pius C. Kuriakose, J Under challenge in this revision filed by the tenant under Section 20 is order of eviction concurrently passed against him by the statutory authorities on the ground of requirement of re- construction [the ground under Section 11(4)(iv)]. On going through the order of the Rent Control Court and the Judgment of the Appellate Authority, we find that those authorities have found on the basis of evidence that all statutory prerequisites for ordering eviction under Section 11(4)(iv) have been established in this case. It R. C. R. No.147 of 2010 -2- has been found on the basis of evidence including a report of the Commissioner who conducted local inspection that the building is in such a condition as warranting re-construction. It has been found that the landlords are possessed of the requisite plan and licence. It has been found that the proposal for re-construction will be profitable from the landlords' point of view. It has also been found that the landlord has the wherewithal to carry out re-construction. We have also found that the statutory authorities under their respective orders provided that in terms of the third proviso to Section 11(4)(iv), the revision petitioner should be re-inducted into the new building after re-construction subject to his liability to pay fair rent. Under the statutory R. C. R. No.147 of 2010 -3- scheme, the final authority on facts is the Rent Control Appellate Authority. Since that authority's judgment has been rendered on a correct appreciation of the evidence on record, we do not think that we will be justified in invoking the revisional jurisdiction under Section 20. 2. Nevertheless, Mr.Krishna Mani, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner sought for one year's time for the revision petitioner to vacate the premises. We are not inclined to grant so much of time since any delay in the matter of carrying out re-construction is likely to result in escalation of the construction cost of the building. However, in deference to the learned counsel's request, we feel that time can be granted to the revision petitioner to surrender the premises till R. C. R. No.147 of 2010 -4- 31/12/10 subject to certain conditions. 3. The result of the above discussion is that the RCR will stand dismissed confirming orders of the authorities below under Section 11(4)(iv). The execution court is however, directed not to order and effect delivery of the building till 31/12/10 subject to the following conditions:- 1) The revision petitioner will file an affidavit before the execution court or the Rent Control Court as the case may be undertaking to give peaceful surrender of the building to the respondents on or before 31/12/10 and undertaking further that arrears of rent if any due as on date will be deposited within one month and occupational charges at the current rent rate will also be paid without fail till he makes actual R. C. R. No.147 of 2010 -5- surrender of the building. All other conditions imposed by the statutory authorities regarding the period during which the re-construction should be completed and the revision petitioner's right to be re-inducted under Section 11(4)(iv) third proviso are confirmed. We make it clear that time as ordered above need be given to the revision petitioner only if he files affidavit as directed above on time. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE C. K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE kns/-