IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2009 / 17TH ASHADHA 1931 CRP.No. 438 of 2003() --------------------- REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/RESPONDENT ----------------------------------------- C.M.NATARAJAN, S/O. C.S.MADHAVANACHARI, CHOORAKATTIL HOUSE, KALANKUNNU, NILAMBUR POST. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/PETITIONER ------------------------------------ PATHATH PARVATHY AMMA, D/O. PATHATH MADHAVIYAMMA, MANALODY, NILAMBUR TALUK. ADV. SRI.K.P.MUJEEB THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C.R.P.No.438 OF 2003 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 8th day of July, 2009 ORDER Barkath Ali, J. In this revision petition under Section 20 of the Kerala Buildings ( Lease and Rent Control) Act 1965, the defeated tenant challenges the concurrent findings of the Rent Control Court and the Appellate Authority ordering eviction under Section 11(2)(b), 11(3) and 11(4) of the Act. 2. The revision petitioner/landlord filed R.C.P.No.33/96 before the Rent Control Court (Munsiff), Manjeri claiming eviction under Section 11(2)(b), 11(3) and 11(4) of the Act alleging that the revision petitioner kept rent in arrears from December 24, 1990 onwards, that the landlord's husband who is a retired overseer from KSEB intends to start a business of Electrical goods in the petition schedule building and that the revision petitioner damaged the building by improper use thereby reducing its value and utility. The revision petitioner/ tenant resisted the claim stating that he has paid rent upto June 1996, that thereafter the landlord refused to receive the rent, that the bonafide need urged by the landlord is not genuine as the husband of the landlord is working as Clerk in temple and that he did not CRP.No.438/03 2 cause any damage to the building. 3. PWs 1 and 2 were examined and Exts.A1 to Ext.A4 were marked on the side of the landlord and on the side of the tenant, RW1 was examined, Ext.B1 was produced before the trial court. The Rent Control Court on an appreciation of evidence found that the rent is in arrears from December 1999 onwards, that the landlord requires the building for her husband to conduct electrical shop, that the tenant is not entitled to the benefit of the second proviso to Sub Section 3 of Section 11, that because of his improper use of the building, the tenant caused damage to the same reducing its value and utility and ordered eviction under Section 11(2)(b), 11(3) and 11(4) of the Act. The Appellate Authority has confirmed the said finding of the Rent Control Court. 4. We have gone through the evidence adduced by both sides before the lower court, the order of the Rent Control Court and the judgment of the Appellate Authority. We find no ground to interfere with the said concurrent findings of both the courts below to invoke the revisional jurisdiction of this court under Section 20 of the Rent Control Act. That being so, the revision petition has to be dismissed. 5. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner sought time to surrender the building as the revision petitioner is conducting smithy works CRP.No.438/03 3 in the petition schedule building. Taking into account the above fact, we feel that time can be granted upto 31/12/2009 to surrender the building on the following conditions : 1) The revision petitioner shall file an affidavit before the Rent Control Court or the Execution Court undertaking to surrender the petition schedule building to the landlord peacefully on or before 31/12/2009. 2) The petitioner shall pay rent upto the date as found by the Rent Control Court before the Rent Control Court within one month from this date, failing which, the benefit of time granted by this order will not be available for the tenant. In the result, the revision petition is dismissed with the above directions. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI JUDGE sv. CRP.No.438/03 4