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 21ST NOVEMBER 2008 / 30TH KARTHIKA 1930 RCRev..No. 277 of 2008(B) ------------------------- RCA.13/2008 of D.C. & SESSIONS COURT,KOLLAM RCP.32/2006 of ADDL.MUNSIFF COURT, KOLLAM .................... REVISION PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS 1, 3 & 4/CR. PETITIONERS 1, 3 & 4(S): -------------------- 1. M. MUTHULEKSHMI, SREE UMAMAHESWARA BHAVAN, MUNDACKAL, KOLLAM, FROM NEW NEST BUNGLOW, PATTATHANAM, KOLLAM. 2. S. SREEKANTH, DO. 3. S. SREEKANTH, DO. BY ADV. SRI.B.SURESH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS & 2ND APPELLANT/PETITIONERS & 2ND COUNTER PETITIONER. --------------- 1. R. PRATHAP, NANI NIVAS, UDAYAMARTHANDAPURAM, MUNDACKAL, KOLLAM. 2. R . PREETHA, DO. 3. R. PRAKASH, DO. 4. S. BABU SWAMINATHAN, SREE UMAMAHESWARA BHAVAN, MUNDACKAL, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/11/2008, A/W. RCR 284/08, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: I.A. NO.2524/08 IN RCR 277/2008 DISMISSED. 21/11/2008 SD/- P.R. RAMAN, JUDGE. SD/- .T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. // TRUE COPY // P.S. TO JUDGE P.R.Raman & T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.C.R. Nos.277 & 284 of 2008 - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 21st day of November, 2008. O R D E R Raman, J. Both the above revision petitions arise out of a common order of eviction passed in R.C.P.Nos.32/2006 and 38/2006 by the Addl. Rent Control Court, Kollam and affirmed by the Appellate Authority. Eviction was sought by the landlords both on the grounds under Section 11(2)(b) and 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act, 1965. The case of the landlords was that a two storied commercial building in 23.83 ares of land with its eastern portion having full road frontage belongs to the petitioners/landlords. In that, building Nos.947, 948 and 950 are on the ground floor and the building is in Ward No.17 of Kollam Corporation. Room No.947 which is the subject matter in R.C.P.No.32/2006 was let out to late Saravana Bhavan in the year 1980 for a monthly rent of Rs.2,000/- after receipt of an advance amount of Rs.25,000/-. The tenancy arrangement was with the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners. While litigations were pending between the original landlord and the tenants, the petitioners purchased the said building by Ext.A1, in 1994. After intimating RCR 277 & 284/2008 -2- the transfer, the tenants attorned to the petitioners. Building Nos.948 and 950 were outstanding on lease at the time of purchase. Building No.949, however, occupied by a national bank then, was later evicted and the petitioners got possession of the same. The petitioners' father owned 9.78 ares of land adjacent to the petition schedule building. In the adjacent land there is a hotel run by the father under the name and style “Nani Hotel”. For the effective, better and more profitable hotel business, the father of the petitioners wants to open a shopping complex and a coffee shop as annexures to the hotel. Neither their father nor the petitioners have any other rooms to provide for the father for the said purpose and the father is dependent on the petitioners. Hence, the petitioners bonafide need the petition schedule building. The rent is also in arrears. The same is the allegation in the other Rent Control Petition also. 2. The landlord-tenant relationship is not disputed. After analysing the evidence in the matter both oral and documentary, the Rent Control Court ordered eviction. The Appellate Court, after re-appreciation of the evidence, agreed with the findings of the Rent Control Court and the present revision petitions are filed against the judgment of the Appellate Authority. 3. We have heard learned counsel on both sides. Shri B. RCR 277 & 284/2008 -3- Sureshkumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in R.C.P.No.277/2008 and Shri S. Ramesh Babu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in R.C.P.No.284/2008, after arguing for some time, fairly submitted that they seek to withdraw the contentions raised in the revision petitions, however, sought for a larger time to vacate the tenanted premises. The respondents' counsel has no serious objection in granting time. After considering the fact that the tenants are continuing business in the tenanted premises, the prayer for a reasonable time to give vacant possession of the premises, is found to be justified. Accordingly, the revision petitions are dismissed, however, the execution of the order of eviction passed by the Rent Control Court and affirmed by the Appellate Authority will stand deferred for a period of 10 months from today on the following conditions: i) That the entire arrears of rent, if any, shall be deposited before the Execution Court within a period of three weeks from today and the respective petitioners shall also file an affidavit within the said time undertaking to give vacant possession of the tenanted premises on or before the expiry of the period of ten months' from today, i.e. on or before 21.9.2009. RCR 277 & 284/2008 -4- ii) that the tenants shall not induct any third party into the premises; iii) that an amount equivalent to the rent towards use and occupation of the building shall be regularly paid by the tenants until vacant possession is given; and iv) that if for any reason the tenants fail to comply with any of the aforesaid conditions, the order of eviction passed by the court below will forthwith become enforceable. ( P.R.Raman, Judge.) (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/