IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2011 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1933 OP (RC).No. 1210 of 2011(O) ---------------------------------- RCP.14/2009 of RENT CONTROL COURT, NORTH PARAVUR .................... PETITIONER --------------- AUGUSTINE, S/O.OUSEPH, MANAVALAN HOUSE PARAVOOTHARA MURI, PARAVOOR VILLAGE, PARAVOOR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.M.S.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- JOWAN PAUL, W/O.PAUL, MALIACKAL HOUSE,PARAVOOTHARA MURI, PARAVOOR VILLAGE, PARAVUR TALUK 683 513. BY ADVS. SRI.P.N.RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR SRI.P.VISWANATHAN THIS OP (RENT CONTROL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = O.P.(R.C.) NO. 1210 OF 2011 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2011. J U D G M E N T PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by a tenant who is defending an action for eviction invoking ground under sub-Section 3 of S.11 of Act 2 of 1965. Interalia he has claimed the protection of the 2nd proviso to sub-section 3 of S.11 obviously with the objective of proving that he is depending mainly on the income that he derives from the business carried on the tenanted premises. He produced photostat copies of documents pertaining to his sales tax returns submitted for assessment during a particular O.P.(R.C.) NO. 1210 OF 2011 -:2:- period. Apart from that he also produced item No.6 in Ext.B3 before the Court. In order to show that item No.6 in Ext.B3 are true copies of the original, he summoned an officer from the VAT office for the production of the original documents as the 3rd witness on his side. Learned Rent Control Court has refused marking of the document taking the view that S.85 of the Kerala Vat Act prohibits production of like documents as they are confidential ones. She has also taken the view that the documents are not relevant. Whether or not the documents are relevant is a matter that can be decided by the Rent Control Court one the documents are put in evidence. As for the admittance of the documents produced on summons, it is very clearly submitted by Advocate Sri.P.Viswanathan that O.P.(R.C.) NO. 1210 OF 2011 -:3:- item No.6 in Ext.P3 already produced by the petitioner can be marked in evidence on the side of the tenant. We record the above statement and dispose of the writ petition without examining the merits of the grounds. Sd/- PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. Sd/- N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/- [ True copy ] P.S. to Judge. .