IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 7TH MARCH 2011 / 16TH PHALGUNA 1932 RCRev..No. 101 of 2011() ------------------------ RCA.9/2004 of RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY -II, PATHANAMTHITTA RCP.10/2002 of MUSNIFF COURT,ADOOR .................... PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS (S): -------------------- 1. JOHN MATHEW, S/O.K.M.MATHEW, KANJIRAKATTU BUNGLOW,PANNIVIZHA MURI, ADOOR VILLAGE AND TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST. 2. ROY MATHEW, S/O.K.M.MATHEW, DO. BY ADV. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. ABDUL SALIM SAHIB RIYAZ AHAMMED, PUTHEN BUNGLOW, MANCHALLOOR MURI, PATHANAPURAM VILLAGE AND TALUK. 2. AISHA JUVERIA, DO. 3. S.NISHA, DO. 4. S.SHAFEENA (MINOR), DO. REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SEENATH SALIM (5TH RESPONDENT.) 5. SEENATH SALI, DO. 6. SHAHINA JUVERIA (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN LAILA BEEVI (7TH RESPONDENT). 7. LAILA BEEVI, NISHAD GARDENS, NADUKKUMA MURI, PATHANAMTHITTA VILLAGE. ADV. SRI.M.SREEKUMAR FOR R4,5 THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------ R.C.R.No. 101 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 7th day of March, 2011 O R D E R Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Under challenge in this revision filed under Section by the tenants is the judgment of the Rent Control Appellate Authority confirming the order of eviction passed by the Rent Control Court under Sections 11(2)(b) and 11(3). 2. Even though various apparently attractive grounds are raised and Sri.V.Philip Mathews, learned counsel for the revision petitioners, addressed arguments before us on the basis of those grounds, we do not find any warrant for invocation of the revisional jurisdiction under Section 20 on the impugned judgment of the Appellate Authority. On going through the order of the Rent Control Court and the judgment of the Appellate Authority, we find that the findings therein regarding the existence of the ground under Section 11(2)(b) and 11(3) are reasonable findings founded on the evidence available on record. RCR.No.101/2011 2 When reasonable findings founded on evidence are arrived at by the final statutory fact finding authority viz. the Rent Control Appellate Authority, this court in revision not ordinarily expected to make reappraisal of the evidence for the purpose of substituting conclusions on fact arrived at by the fact finding authorities. When we informed Mr.Philip Mathews of the difficulty to invoke the revisional jurisdiction on the impugned judgment, he would make a plea for granting a reasonable time to the revision petitioners/tenants to vacate the premises. Under the above circumstances, even as we confirm the impugned judgment and dismiss the revision petition, there will be a direction to the Execution Court to keep in abeyance proceedings for delivery of the building till 31/7/2011. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE dpk