IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2011 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1933 RCRev..No. 146 of 2011 --------------------------- RCA.135/2005 of RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY/ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, VADAKARA OS.54/2001 of MUNSIFF COURT, VADAKARA .................... REVISION PETITIONER(APPELLANT/DEFENDANT) ------------------------------------------------------ DIVAKARAN, S/O KELAPPAN, RESIDING AT KELOTH PARAMBATH (H), ERAMALA AMSOM, AADIYOOR DESOM, VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR SMT.VANDANA MENON SMT.ANJU P.NAIR RESPONDENT(S) : (RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF) --------------------------------------------------- THANARI MOIDU HAJEE, S/O MAMMED, RESIDING AT VARAPRATH, P.O. ONCHIYAM AMSOM DESOM, VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT - 673001. THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & N. K. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ R. C. R. No.146 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 30th day of March, 2011 ORDER Pius C. Kuriakose, J The tenant is the revision petitioner. He challenges the judgment of the Rent Control Appellate Authority confirming the order of the Rent Control Court fixing the fair rent of the building under his possession at Rs.1,000/- per mensem. 2. Several apparently attractive grounds have been raised and Sri.T.Sethumadhavan, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner addressed very persuasive arguments before us on the basis of those grounds. We have gone through the judgment of the Appellate Authority and the order of the Rent Control Court carefully. It is evident that the building in question is situated in a commercially very important area in Eramala Grama Panchayath not far away from Vatakara municipal town. The contract rent of Rs.425/- was fixed way back in 1985. The extent of the room will be about 520 sq. ft. It was R. C. R. No.146 of 2011 -2- relying on the evidence which consisted inter alia of Exts.A4 and A5, two other rent chits in respect of nearby buildings, that the statutory authorities fixed the fair rent at Rs.1,000/-. There was the Advocate Commissioner's report also which showed that the building in question was comparable to the buildings covered by Exts.A4 and A5. 3. Having anxiously gone through the impugned judgment, we are of the view that the rate presently fixed by the statutory authorities in no way exceeds the fair rent of the building. We find no warrant for interference. Hence, the RCR will stand dismissed. However, we make it clear that the revision petitioner is given one year time to discharge the arrears of rent which becomes payable by virtue of the fixation of fair rent. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE N. K. BALAKRISHNAN JUDGE kns/- R. C. R. No.146 of 2011 -3-