IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2011 / 8TH ASHADHA 1933 SA.No. 882 of 1999(E) --------------------- AS.117/1999 of SUB COURT,IRINJALAKUDA OS.838/1997 of MUNSIFF COURT, KODUNGALLUR .................... APPELLANT(S) (APPELLANTS-DEFENDANTS) :- -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. BHASKARAN, SON OF PERUMKULAM SANKU, PANANGAD DESOM, SREENARAYANAPURAM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK. (DIED) 2. SANKURU, SON OF THANDASSERIVEETTIL RAMAN, MATHILAKAM DESOM, PAPPINIVATTOM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK. ADDL.3. CHANDRAMATHY, WIFE OF LATE SRI.BHASKARAN, AGED 54, PERUMKULAM, PANANGAD, SREENARAYANAPURAM PANCHAYATH, KODUNGALLUR. ” 4. DINESH, SON OF LATE SRI.BHASKARAN, AGED 35, PERUMKULAM, PANANGAD, SREENARAYANAPURAM PANCHAYATH, KODUNGALLUR. ” 5. PRADEEP, SON OF LATE SRI.BHASKARAN, AGED 33, PERUMKULAM, PANANGAD, SREENARAYANAPURAM PANCHAYATH, KODUNGALLUR. ” 6. SANTHOSH, SON OF LATE SRI.BHASKARAN, AGED 29, PERUMKULAM, PANANGAD, SREENARAYANAPURAM PANCHAYATH, KODUNGALLUR. ADDL.APPELLANTS 3 TO 6 ARE IMPLEADED AS THE LRs OF DECEASED 1ST APPELLANT AS PER ORDER DATED 10.9.2002 IN CMP.1650/2002. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VENUGOPALAN SRI.SHIBU JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S) (RESPONDENTS-PLAINTIFFS) :- --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. KAUSALLYADEVI, WIFE OF PUVATHUMKADAVIL RAVEENDRAN, NADAVARAMBU DESOM, VELOOKARA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 2. SEENA P. RAVEENDRAN, DAUGHTER OF PUVATHUMKADAVIL RAVEENDRAN, NADAVARAMBU DESOM, VELOOKARA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 3. SIMI RAVEENDRAN, DAUGHTER OF PUVATHUMKADAVIL RAVEENDRAN, NADAVARAMBU DESOM, VELOOKARA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. ADV. SRI.M.C.GOPI FOR R1 TO 3 THIS SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jvt SA.No. 882 of 1999 ORDER IN C.M.P.No.2473/1999 IN S.A.No.882/1999 Dismissed. SD/- P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE. 29.6.2011 //True Copy// P.A. to Judge P.BHAVADASAN, J. ----------------------------- S.A. No.882 of 1999-E --------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of June 2011 J U D G M E N T The defendants in O.S.No.838 of 1997 who suffered order of eviction with liability to pay arrears of rent are the appellants. 2. It is unnecessary to go into the details since this appeal could be disposed of on a short ground. Relationship between the plaintiffs and the defendants as landlord and tenant is admitted. At the relevant time, the building was situate in an area where Act 2 of 1965 was not applicable. The suit was decreed and the decree was challenged in the appeal. 3. Though the defendants challenged the decree for eviction and arrears of rent before the Sub Court, Irinjalakuda, the lower appellate court found no reason to S.A. No.882 of 1999-E -: 2 :- interfere and dismissed the appeal. While the appeal was pending, Government have issued a notification No.G.O. (Ms) 56/99/Housing dt.22/12/99 excluding the provisions of Act 2 of 1965 to the area where the plaint schedule building is situated. Therefore, eviction can be obtained only by taking recourse to the provisions of Act 2 of 1965. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. While the decrees of the courts below granting eviction are set aside reserving the right of the plaintiffs to take such steps as are available to them under law for evicting the defendants from the plaint schedule property, that portion of decree granting arrears of rent is confirmed. There will be no order as to costs. P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE. Jvt