IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 3RD OCTOBER 2008 / 11TH ASWINA 1930 RCRev..No. 162 of 2008() ------------------------ RCA.34/2007 of ADDL. DISTRICT COURT-II, KOZHIKODE RCP.11/2006 of MUNSIFF COURT, QUILANDY .................... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT -------------------- KUZHIKANDATHIL KARUNAKARA KURUP 54 YEARS, S/O.CHANDUKUTTY KURUP BALUSSERY AMSOM, PUTHUR VATTOM DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. MALAYILAKATHOOTH MAMMED KOYA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, S/O.ABU HAJI , BALUSSERY AMSOM PUTHUR VATTOM DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK 2. MALAYILAKATHOOTH AYISHA UMMA, 58 YEARS W/O.MAMMED KOYA, BALUSSERY AMSOM PUTHUR VATTOM DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK 3. MALAYILAKATHOOTH ASHARAF, 35 YEARS S/O.MAMMED KOYA, BUSINESS, BALUSERY AMSOM, PUTHUR VATTOM DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK BY ADV. SRI.SANTHARAM.P THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: RCRev..No. 162 of 2008 ORDER ON I.A.NO.1558/2008 IN R.C.R.NO.162/2008 CLOSED. SD/-P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE SD/-T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE 03/10/2008 \\TRUE COPY// P.A to Judge P.R.RAMAN & T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ R.C.R.No.162 of 2008-E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Dated this the 3rd day of October, 2008 RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. This revision is filed at the instance of the tenant aggrieved by the order passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority in R.C.A.No.34/2007. Eviction was sought by the landlord under Sections 11(2)(b), 11(3), 11(4)(ii) and 11(4)(iii) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). It was ordered under Section 11(3) and 11(4)(ii) and 11(4)(iii) of the Act which stands affirmed by the Appellate Authority. We are of the view that the authorities have considered the pleadings and evidence in detail and there is no scope for interference in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction. 2. After arguing for some time, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the tenant may be granted some longer time to vacate the premises and he will withdraw his contentions. We have considered the said plea. Accordingly, the following order is passed. 3. The eviction ordered by the authorities below is affirmed and the execution of which will stand deferred for a period of six months from today on the following conditions:- R.C.R.NO.162/2008 -:2:- i. That the petitioner herein shall file an undertaking in the form of an affidavit before the Execution Court agreeing to surrender vacant possession of the premises on or before the expiry of six months and such undertaking shall be given within a period of three weeks from today. That he shall also deposit the entire arrears of rent, if any, less whatever that has been deposited, within the aforesaid period of three weeks before the Execution Court. ii. That he shall not induct any third party into the premises. iii.That he shall continue to pay the amount equivalent to the monthly rent for use and occupation, until vacant possession of the premises is surrendered to the landlord. In case of failure to comply with any of the aforesaid conditions, the order of eviction passed by the authorities below shall become enforceable forthwith. P.R.RAMAN, Judge T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Judge ms