IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 23RD NOVEMBER 2009 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA 1931 RCRev..No. 277 of 2009() ------------------------ RCA.13/2008 OF RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, KOTTAYAM OP(RC) 8/2007 OF RENT CONTROLLER, VAIKOM .................... REV.PETITIONER/APPELLANT/COUNTER PETITIONER --------------------------------------------------------------- ANILKUMAR, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, KAKKOLI HOUSE, KIZHAKKUMCHERRY, THEKKUMURI, AYYARKULANGARA BHAGOM, THEKKENADA P.O., NADUVILE VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.S.NANDANAN SRI.P.N.ANOOP RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS -------------------------------------- 1. DHEEVARA EDUCATION TRUST NO.2000/88, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, PADMANABHAN, AGED 66 YEARS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, KADAVITHARA HOUSE, ERAMALLUR KARA, EZHUPUNNA VILLAGE, CHERTHALA. 2. DHEEVARA EDUCATION TRUST NO.2000/88, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, K.S.BAHULEYAN, S/O.SANKARAN, RESIDING AT KUDAPPANATHARA HOUSE, CHANDIROOR KARA, AROOR VILLAGE, CHERTHALA. THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/11/2009, ALONG WITH RCR 278/09 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ R.C.R NOS: 277 & 278 OF 2009 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd November, 2009. O R D E R SURENDRA MOHAN, J. The tenants are the revision petitioners. The Rent Control Petition was filed by the respondents-landlords, the Dheevara Educational Trust to which the petition schedule premises in both these cases belong. The eviction was sought alleging arrears of rent under Section 11(2)(b) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act', for short. 2. The respondents are the landlords of the petition schedule building. The petitioners in both these revisions are occupying separate premises owned by the respondents. According to the tenants, there are no arrears of rent for the reason that they had been paying rent to Akhila Kerala Dheevara Sabha (AKDS) Taluk Committee, Vaikom, instead of the respondents. According to the tenants, the Akhila Kerala Dheevara Sabha was the owner in possession of the building of which the petition schedule premises are a part. Therefore, they contended that the Rent Control Petition was liable to be dismissed. RCR Nos: 277 & 278/2009 2 3. On the basis of the above contentions the Rent Control Court, Vaikom tried the petitions. Both oral and documentary evidence have been let in. Ext.A1 in both the cases are the rent deeds executed by the respective revision petitioners in favour of the respondents. According to the tenants, there was a suit O.S.No: 371/95 between the Akhila Kerala Dheevara Sabha and the respondents-trust. It is the case of the tenants that they started paying rent to the Sabha after the dismissal of the said suit. The judgment in O.S.No:371/95 has been produced. The same is Ext.A6 in one case and Ext.A10 in the other case. The same is dated 11.4.2001. The rent deeds in both the cases have been executed before the dismissal of the said suit. The tenants have produced Exts.B1 to B13 in one case and Exts. B1 to B8 in the other case, claiming that they were receipts issued for payment of rent to the Akhila Kerala Dheevara Sabha. Though the dismissal of the suit was in the year 2001, according to the tenants, they have started paying rent to the Sabha only from September 2004, long after the RCR Nos: 277 & 278/2009 3 dismissal of the suit. There is no convincing reason stated for having started payment of rent to the Sabha from the said date. 4. It is contended by the counsel for the revision petitioners that the respondents had not produced any evidence to show that they were the landlords or that they had ownership rights in respect of the tenanted premises. The rent deeds in both these revisions are admitted by the tenants. The rent deeds clearly show that the respondents are the landlords in respect of the tenanted premises. It is also admitted that the tenants had been paying rent to the respondents till September 2004, after which date, they started paying rent to the Akhila Kerala Dheevara Sabha. However, as rightly found by the authorities below payment of rent to the Akhila Kerala Dheevara Sabha cannot be considered to be due payment of rent to the landlords. It is contended by the counsel for the revision petitioner that if the tenants are compelled to pay the rent again, it would amount to double payment of the rent. However, it is to be noted that in view of the availability of the RCR Nos: 277 & 278/2009 4 receipts evidencing payment of rent to the Akhila Kerala Dheevara Sabha, the tenants are free to recover the payments so made erroneously to the said organisation by filing a suit against them. But, payment of rent to the said organisation cannot be considered to be payment of rent in respect of the tenanted premises to the landlord. The authorities below were right in finding that the tenants have defaulted payment of rent and ordering eviction under Section 11(2)(b) of the Act. 5. We do not find any grounds to interfere with the concurrent findings of the Rent Control Court and the Appellate Authority. We also note that the order of eviction granted under Section 11(2)(b) is only a provisional order which can be got vacated by the tenant by depositing the arrears of rent under Section 11(2) (c) of the Act. The tenant is also free to institute a suit for recovery of the amounts paid under a mistake to the Akhila Kerala Dheevara Sabha, as evidenced by the receipts produced in these proceedings. 6. In the result, both the Rent Control Revisions are RCR Nos: 277 & 278/2009 5 dismissed. However, the tenants are given the liberty to get the orders of eviction passed by the Rent Control Court in these cases vacated, by depositing the arrears of rent in accordance with Section 11(2)(c) of the Act, for which the tenants are granted a period of two months from today. It is further made clear that the tenants shall be entitled to file a suit for the recovery of the amounts paid by them to the Akhila Kerala Dheevara Sabha, as evidenced by the receipts produced by them. In the circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. --------------------------------------- L.A.A.NO: --------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Dated: