IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 30TH MAGHA 1930 RCRev..No. 178 of 2008() ------------------------ RCA.107/2004 of DISTRICT COURT, THALASSERY RCP.10/2002 of MUNSIF COURT, KUTHUPARAMBA .................... PETITIONER/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------- 1. PAYYANVEETTIL PADMANABHAN NAIR (DIED ON 25-6-2008) S/O.KRISHNAN NAMBIAR BUSINESS, PREMIER FOOT WEAR, NERAMPOKKU ROAD KEEZHUR AMSOM DESOM, P.O.,IRITTY, THALASSERY TALUK 2. PRAMOD, AGED 40 YEARS S/O. LATE PADMANABHAN NAIR, PAYYANVEETTIL NERAMPOKKU ROAD, KEEZHUR AMSOM DESOM, P.O.,IRITTY, THALASSERY TALUK 3. SANTHA, AGED 60 YEARS W/O.LATE PADMANABHAN NAIR, PAYYANVEETTIL NERAMPOKKU ROAD, KEEZHUR AMSOM DESOM, P.O.,IRITTY, THALASSERY TALUK 4. PRAVEEN, AGED 38 YEARS S/O.LATE PADMANABHAN NAIR, PAYYANVEETTIL NERAMPOKKU ROAD, KEEZHUR AMSOM DESOM, P.O.,IRITTY, THALASSERY TALUK 5. PRAJITHA, AGED 35 YEARS D/O.LATE PADMANABHAN NAIR, PAYYANVEETTIL NERAMPOKKU ROAD, KEEZHUR AMSOM DESOM, P.O.,IRITTY, THALASSERY TALUK . 6. PRASEETA, AGED 32 YEARS D/O.LATE PADMANABHAN NAIR, PAYYANVEETTIL NERAMPOKKU ROAD, KEEZHUR AMSOM DESOM, P.O.,IRITTY, THALASSERY TALUK . BY ADV. SRI.KURIAN GEORGE KANNAMTHANAM, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.JIJI THOMAS SRI.VIJAI MATHEWS RCR.NO.178/08 2 RESPONDENT(S): --------------- CHERUVATTI NABEESA, W/O. ASSAINAR, AGED 47 NO OCCUPATION RESIDING AT KOLARI AMSOM MARUTHAYI DESOM P.O PORORA, THALASSERY TALUK THROUGH HER POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, CHERUVATTY NASARUDHEEN, S/O. ASSAINAR, AGED 27.NO OCCUPATION RESIDING AT KOLARI AMSOM MARUTHAYIL DESOM P.O PORORA THALASSERY TALUK ADV. SRI.R.SURENDRAN THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT No representation for the revision petitioner today also. Counsel for the respondent is ready. Revision petition is dismissed for default. 19-02-2009 Sd/-, PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE Sd/-, C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------ R.C.R.No. 178 OF 2008 ------------------------ Dated this the 30th day of March, 2009 ORDER Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Under challenge in this revision petition filed by the tenant is an order of eviction passed concurrently by the Rent Control Court and the Appellate Authority under sub section (3) of Section 11 of the Act 2 of 1965. Even though eviction was sought for on various grounds, we, in this revision petition, are concerned with the orders passed under sub section (3) of Section 11 only. The need projected in the rent control petition by the landlady was the requirement of his dependent son to carry on business. In fact, the de facto claimant son himself filed rent control petition in his capacity as the power of attorney holder of his mother and he himself was examined as PW1. The Authorities below were very much inspired by the oral evidence given by PW1 and concluded concurrently that the need put forth is a bona fide one. Even though the tenant had claimed protection of the second proviso to sub section (3) of Section R.C.R..No.178/2008 2 11, both the authorities below found, on the basis of the evidence which was available on record, that the tenant has miserably failed in establishing that he satisfies either of the ingredients of that proviso. 3. Having gone through the impugned judgment and having heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner tenant and those of the respondent landlady, we do not find any infirmity about the orders of the Rent Control Court and the Appellate Authority and much less any irregularity, illegality or impropriety warranting invocation of the revisional jurisdiction of this court under Section 20. The revision petition will stand dismissed. However, considering the appealing request of the learned counsel for the revision petitioners, even as the revision is dismissed, there will be a direction to the Execution Court not to deliver the petition schedule building to the respondents till 1st August 2009 on condition that the revision petitioners file a joint affidavit before the Execution Court stating that they will peacefully surrender possession of the building to the landlady or PW1 before the first August, 2009. Such an affidavit will be filed on or before R.C.R..No.178/2008 3 8/4/2009. Once such an affidavit is noticed, the execution petition will be adjourned to 3/8/2009. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE dpk