IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 3RD SEPTEMBER 2010 / 12TH BHADRA 1932 RCRev..No. 125 of 2004() ------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 12/02/2004 IN RCA 136/01, RCA.132/2001 of RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, KOZHIKODE RCP.88/2000 of RENT CONTROL COURT,.KOZHIKODE-I .................... REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT IN RCA 132/01 AND APPELLANT IN RCA 136/01/PETITIONER -------------------------------------------------- PARAPARAMBATH REMADEVI W/O. MOHANDAS RADHAKRISHNAN, AGED 52 YEARS, RETD. TEACHER, RESIDING AT REMYA, KOZHIPPURAM COMPOUND, PANNIYANKARA AMSOM AND DESOM OF KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.A.P.CHANDRASEKHARAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SMT.PRABHA R.MENON SRI.M.KRISHNAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. K.P.MADHAVAN, S/O. KUNHIRAMAN, AGED 90 YEARS, QUALITY TRADERS, BIG BAZAR, NAGARAM AMSOM AND DESOM OF KOZHIKODE TALUK, RESIDING AT KUNNUMMAL PUTHALATH P.O., PALLIKUNNU PANCHAYATH OFFICE, KANNUR. ( DIED) LRS IMPLEADED. 2. T.P.SACHEENDRA BABU, S/O. T.P.KRISHNAN, AGED 47 YEARS, QUALITY TRADES, BIG BAZAR NAGARAM AMSOM AND DESOM OF KOZHIKODE TALUK. ADDL.R3. P.SASIDHARAN, S/O. K.P.MADHAVAN, “SRUTHI” NAMBIPARAMBA, PALAKADA ROAD, PUTHIYANGADI, KOZHIKODE. R4. SALINI RAVINDRAN, D/O. K.P.MADHAVAN, C/O. P.VENUGOPAL, “ACHUTHAM” LANCE NAIK SREEJITH ROAD, WEST HILL,KOZHIKODE. . R5. SUHASINI SIVANANDAN, D/O. K.P. MADHAVAN, C/O. P.VENUGOPAL, “ACHUTHAM” LANCE NAIK SREEJITH ROAD, WEST HILL,KOZHIKODE. R6. P.MURALEEDHARAN S/O. K.P. MADHAVAN, C/O. P.VENUGOPAL, “ACHUTHAM” LANCE NAIK SREEJITH ROAD, WEST HILL,KOZHIKODE. R7. P.VENUGOPAL, S/O.K.P. MADHAVAN, “ACHUTHAM” LANCE NAIK SREEJITH ROAD, WEST HILL,KOZHIKODE. R8. P.SUHAS, S/O.K.P. MADHAVAN, C/O. P.VENUGOPAL, “ACHUTHAM” LANCE NAIK SREEJITH ROAD, WEST HILL,KOZHIKODE. R9. P.SUNIL, S/O. K.P. MADHAVAN, C/O. P.VENUGOPAL, “ACHUTHAM” LANCE NAIK SREEJITH ROAD, WEST HILL,KOZHIKODE. (ADDL.R3 TO R9 ARE IMPLEADED AS THE LRS OF THE DECEASED 1ST RESPONDENT VIDE ORDER DATED 12/8/2010 IN I.A. NO.342/2009 IN RCR 1265/2004) ADV. SRI.V.N.SWAMINATHAN FOR R2 SRI.T.C.MOHANDAS FOR R1&ADDL.R5 SRI.T.M.SUNIL FOR R1&ADDL.R5 SMT.S.CHITHRA FOR R1&ADDL.R5 SRI.A.R.GANGADAS FOR R1 SRI.A.S.BRIJESH FOR R1&ADDL.R5 SRI.T.C.MOHANDAS FOR ADDL 3RD &7THR SMT.S.CHITHRA FOR ADDL 3RD &7TH R THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. ------------------------ R.C.R.No.125 OF 2004 ------------------------ Dated this the 3rd day of September, 2010 O R D E R Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Under challenge in this revision petition filed by the landlady is the judgment of the Rent Control Appellate Authority confirming the decision of the Rent Control Court that the RCP is not maintainable as the tenants are entitled to the protection of sub section (17) of Section 11 of Act 2 of 1965. 2. Smt.Prabha R.Menon, learned counsel for the revision petitioner drew our attention to the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in Narayanan v. Shalima (2003 (2) KLT 317(FB) and submitted that the original tenant is now no more and the legal heirs of the original tenant have been impleaded as additional respondents 3 to 9. According to her, in view of the decision of the Full Bench, additional respondents 3 to 9, who are the present tenants, will not be entitled for the benefit of sub section (17) of Section 11. 3. On going through the impugned judgment of the Rent RCR.No.125/2004 2 Control Appellate Authority and the order of the Rent Control Court, we find that the merits of the eviction ground invoked in the RCP was never considered by the statutory authorities. Under the above circumstances, the matter has to go back to the Rent Control Appellate Authority. 4. Hence, we set aside the judgment of the Appellate Authority and remand RCA Nos.132/2001 & 136/2001 to the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Kozhikode. The learned Rent Control Appellate Authority is directed to hear and dispose of both the RCAs on the merits of the various grounds raised therein. 5. Sri.T.C.Mohandas, learned counsel for the respondents/tenants, submitted that during the pendnecy of the RCR before this Court, a room which is adjacent to the petition schedule room and identical to the same, fell vacant. This subsequent event, according to Mr.Mohandas, has fundamental impact on the right of the landlady to get eviction on the ground under sub section (3) of Section 11. We permit the respondents to highlight the above event as a relevant subsequent event affecting the right of the landlady to get eviction and the liability RCR.No.125/2004 3 of the tenants to suffer eviction. The Appellate Authority will notice the event and take decision in accordance with law. The relevancy of the event is a matter for the appellate authority to decide. Transmit the records forthwith to the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Kozhikode. The parties will enter appearance before the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Kozhikode on 30th September 2010. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE dpk RCR.No.125/2004 4 PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE dpk