IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2011 / 19TH SRAVANA 1933 RCRev..No. 272 of 2011() ------------------------------ RCA.33/2007 of RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THRISSUR RCP.57/2004 of RENT CONTROL COURT,THRISSUR .................... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------------------------ NARENDRADAS, AGED 56, S/O.KUNJAYYAPPAKUTTY, PALLATH HOUSE, KODANNUR VILLAGE, ELAD DESOM, THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH) RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/PETITIONER ----------------------------------------------------- VARIED, S/O.CHIRAYATH THOMA, ELAD DESOM, KODANNUR VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 690 001. R1 BY ADVS. SRI.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL) SMT.R.RAJITHA THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------- R.C.R.No.272 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of August, 2011. J U D G M E N T PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. Sri.G.Sreekumar, learned counsel for the revision petitioner addressed arguments based on various grounds. On 13.7.2011 when this R.C.R came up for admission, we were not persuaded to admit the R.C.R. However, on the basis of submission of Sri.Sreekumar that his client is ready and willing to give immediate surrender of one of the two rooms presently possessed by the revision petitioner, and there is likelihood that the landlord will be willing to allow the revision petitioner to continue as a tenant of the other room on attractive terms as to rent, we issued notice for the purpose of exploring the possibility of a settlement between the parties. Today, on receiving notice, the landlord is before us through his advocate Sri.Santhosh. Mr.Santhosh submitted that his client is not willing for a 2 R.C.R.No.272 of 2011 settlement. There may not be any serious objection to this Court granting some time to the tenant for surrendering the premises, provided reasonable rent is given. According to Mr.Santhosh the present rent of Rs.35/- per month for two rooms is ridiculously low. 2. As requested by Mr.Sreekumar we have heard him again. He took us through the judgment of the Rent Control appellate authority and the order of the Rent Control court. He drew our attention to certain portions of the evidence adduced in the case. Having considered the submissions once again, we are of the view that no case is made out for invocation of the revisional jurisdiction under Section 20 on the appellate authority's judgment. On going through the judgment of the appellate authority, we find that the findings entered therein are reasonable findings founded on evidence. When reasonable findings are founded by the appellate authority, which is under the Statutory Scheme the final court on facts, we may not be justified in interfering. We do not find any illegality, irregularity or 3 R.C.R.No.272 of 2011 impropriety as contemplated under Section 20 of the Act in the decision taken by the appellate authority and hence this appeal is liable to be dismissed. We dismiss the R.C.R. However, considering the last plea of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, we are inclined to grant the revision petitioner one year's time from today ie., till 15.8.2012 to surrender the premises subject to the following condition :- The revision petitioner shall file an affidavit before the Execution Court undertaking to give peaceful surrender of the building, which are subject matter of the proceedings to the respondents on or before 15.8.2012. Through the same affidavit, it should be undertaken that arrears of rent, if any, shall be paid within one month, before 10.9.2011 and also undertakes that he will pay occupational charges at Rs.500/- per mensum without fail, till such time the building is surrendered. We 4 R.C.R.No.272 of 2011 make it clear that the revision petitioner will get the benefit of time as allowed above only if he files affidavit on time and honours the undertakings therein. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE ami/