IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 25TH JULY 2011 / 3RD SRAVANA 1933 RCRev..No. 280 of 2011() ------------------------ RCA.26/2009 OF RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, TRIVANDRUM RCP.40/2007 OF RENT CONTROL COURT, TRIVANDRUM .................... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/COUNTER PETITIONER -------------------------------------------------------------------- D.R.RAJU, AGED 45, T.C.39/556, MARKET ROAD, CHALAI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA SRI.M.S.KALESH SMT.A.V.PRIYA SRI.HARISH GOPINATH SRI.V.VINAY MENON SMT.KVP.JAYALEKSHMY SRI.M.AJAY (IRUMPANAM) RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/ADDL. PETITIONERS 2 TO 5: --------------- 1. HAMEEDA BEEVI, D/O.LATE MARIAM BEEVI, SANI BHAVAN, SREENAGAR, PARUTHIPPARA MUTTADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 025. 2. NASARIN, D/O.LATE MOHAMMED HUSSAIN, 19 YEARS, RESIDING AT SANU BHAVAN, SREENAGAR, PARUTHIPPARA, MUTTADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 025. 3. NISIYA, D/O.LATE MOHAMMED HUSSAN, AGED 17 YEARS, SANU BHAVAN, SREENAGAR, PARUTHIPPARA, MUTTADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 025. 4. NASEEF, 8 YEARS, D/O.LATE MOHAMMED HUSSAIN, SANU BHAVAN, SREENAGAR, PARUTHIPPARA, MUTTADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 025. (MINOR RESPONDENTS REPRESENTED BY FIRST RESPONDENT). BY ADV. SRI. B.SATHIQ THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- RCR. No. 280 of 2011 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of July, 2011 O R D E R Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Under challenge in this revision filed by the tenant is the judgment of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Thiruvananthapuram confirming the order of eviction passed by the Rent Control Court against the revision petitioner tenant on the ground under Section 11(4)(3) of Act 2 of 1965. We have today by separate judgment in RCR. Nos. 398, 399, 400, 401, 402 and 403 of 2010 set aside the judgment of the Rent Control Appellate Authority declining eviction on the ground under Section 11(4)(iv) and remanded the RCAs to the Appellate Authority for fresh decision. The first submission of Mr.R.S.Kalkura, learned counsel for the revision petitioner tenant was that as the RCA is going back to the Rent Control Appellate Authority in the context of the ground under Section 11(4)(iv) the order RCR.280/11 -2- of eviction passed under Section 11(4)(iii) be also interfered with and remanded to the Appellate Authority if not to the Rent Control Court. 2. Even though Mr. Kalkura was very persuasive in his submissions, having gone through the judgment of the Appellate Authority and the order of the Rent Control Court, we don't find way to invoke our jurisdiction under Section 20 on the eviction order passed concurrently under Section 11 (4)(3). The legislative intendment underlying Section 11(4) (iii) is that in a situation where there is acute accommodation shortage, the tenants should not be allowed the luxury of having more buildings than necessary for their purpose. Having gone through the impugned judgment, we find that the findings entered therein that the tenant is possessed of other buildings reasonably sufficient for his requirement is a finding founded on evidence. There is no warrant for interference with the eviction order passed by RCR.280/11 -3- the Rent Control Court and the Appellate Authority under Section 11(4)(iii). There is no illegality or impropriety about the findings concurrently entered by the two statutory authorities. 3. The RCR will stand dismissed. However, considering the fervent appeal of Mr. Kalkura, we direct the execution court to keep in abeyance the proceedings for execution of the above eviction order and for delivery of the building to the landlords for a period of nine months from today subject to the following conditions: The revision petitioner will file an affidavit before the execution court undertaking that he will surrender the building peacefully to the respondents on or before expiry of nine months from today. It will also be undertaken that arrears of rent as alleged by the landlord will be paid to the respondent within two months from today and that he will pay occupational charges with effect from 1-8-2011 till he RCR.280/11 -4- surrenders the building at the rate of Rs.500/- per mensem without fail. We make it clear that unless affidavit is filed and the undertakings therein are honoured the petitioner will not get benefit of time as allowed above. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) (C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE) ksv/-