IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH OCTOBER 2011 / 27TH ASWINA 1933 RCRev..No. 386 of 2011(D) ------------------------------- RCA.22/2005 of DISTRICT COURT/RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, KASARAGOD RCP.22/2004 of MUNSIFF COURT/RCC, HOSDRUG .................... PETITIONER/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------- V.P. VENUGOPALAN, S/O B. CHANDAN, R/A VELLIKATH, AJANOOR VILLAGE, HOSDRUG TALUK, P.O.AJANOOR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND 2ND RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. C. KUNHAMBU, S/O KANNAN & KUMBA AMMA, R/A AJANOOR, THERN, VELLIKATH, AJANOOR VILLAGE, HOSDRUG TALUK - 671531, P.O.AJANOOR, KASARAGOD 2. V.P.RAMESH, S/O B. CHANDAN, R/A VELLIKOTH, AJANOOR VILLAGE, HOSDRUG TALUK - 671531 P.O.AJANOOR, KASARAGOD. THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/10/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ R. C. R. No.386 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of October, 2011 ORDER Pius C. Kuriakose, J Under challenge in this revision filed by the tenant is the revised judgment passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Kasaragod under which the learned Appellate Authority has confirmed the order of eviction passed by the Rent Control Court under Sections 11(2)(b) and Section 11 (8). Various grounds have been raised assailing the judgment of the Appellate Authority. Sri.M.Gopikrishnan Nambiar, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner addressed strenuous submissions before us based on those grounds. But having reminded ourselves of the attenuated nature of the jurisdiction in which we are presently sitting and having carefully gone through the impugned judgment of the Appellate Authority and the order of the Rent Control Court, we are of the view that there is no warrant for R. C. R. No.386 of 2011 -2- interference in this revision. The findings entered by the Appellate Authority which under the statutory scheme is the final court on facts are findings founded on evidence. The only submission of Sri.Gopikrishnan Nambiar which had some appeal to us was that a room situated adjacent to the petition schedule room on its eastern side occupied by a tenant named Krishnan had fallen vacant. We find that the learned Appellate Authority has considered the implications of the above vacancy which became available to the landlord. According to us, the learned Appellate Authority rightly found that the need for additional accommodation projected by the landlord can be accomplished only by getting the eviction of the petition schedule building which unlike Krishnan's room is adjacent to the building already occupied by the landlord. At the same time, the submission of Sri.Gopikrishnan Nambar that the revision petitioner will be prepared to take on lease the building which was occupied by Krishnan on attractive terms of rent has some appeal to us. Hence, even as we confirm the judgment of the R. C. R. No.386 of 2011 -3- Appellate Authority and dismiss the RCR we are inclined to issue notice to the landlord. The result of the above discussion is that RCR is dismissed and the judgment of the Appellate Authority is confirmed. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE C. K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE kns/- PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ R. C. R. No.386 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of October, 2011 ORDER Pius C. Kuriakose, J Issue notice to the 1st respondent by speed post to determine the question whether the building which was previously occupied by Krishnan can be let out to the revision petitioner and the further question as to how much time can be granted to the petitioner for surrendering the premises. There will be a direction to the landlord that if the building which was previously occupied by Sri.Krishnan is not already let out to anybody else, he shall not let out that building for a period of six weeks. I.A. No.2347/2011 Interim stay for a period of six weeks from today. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE C. K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE kns/- R. C. R. No.386 of 2011 -5-