IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1930 RSA.No. 997 of 2008() --------------------- AS.89/2004 of PRL.SUB COURT,IRINJALAKUDA OS.87/2003 of M.C.,IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT/DEFENDANT:- --------------------------------------------------- P.K. SANTHOSH, S/O. PERUMARATHUVEETTIL, KRISHNAN, VALATHUPADAM DESOM,CHENGALLUR VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK., BY ADV. SRI.V.BINOY RAM RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF:- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- KOODALMANIKAYAM DEVASWAM, MANAGING COMMITTEE, MANAVALASSERY VILLAGE, REP. BY ADMINISTRATOR. THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.S.A.No.997 of 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 24 th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT The defendant in O.S.No.87 of 2003 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Irinjalakuda is the appellant in this second appeal. The said suit instituted by the respondent herein was one for eviction of the appellant from the plaint schedule room near the Koodalmanikyam temple with arrears of rent. 2. The case of the plaintiff can be summarised as follows:- The plaint schedule room owned by the plaintiff-Devaswom was taken on rent by the defendant on a monthly rent of Rs.1600/- for the purpose of carrying out interior decoration work for six months from 1.8.2000 onwards. The rent was to be paid on the 1st day of each month in the office of the Devaswom Administrator and in the event of default, the amount would fetch an interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The defendant had also undertaken to vacate the plaint schedule room without any demur as and when required to do so by the Devaswom irrespective of the period of tenancy and at his own expense. The defendant is continuing in possession of the room even after R.S.A.No.997 of 2008 2 the expiry of the term. He has kept the rent in arrears from 1.11.2000 onwards. Eventhough the plaintiff caused the lawyer notice dated 4.12.02 issued to the defendant, the defendant has not surrendered vacant possession of the premises nor has he paid the defaulted rent arrears. The tenancy of the defendant was therefore terminated by a notice dated 4.10.02 issued in accordance with Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. Hence the suit. 3. The suit was resisted by the defendant contending, inter alia, as follows:- The entrustment of the room was not for 6 months as alleged in the plaint. It is not correct to state that the rent has been kept in arrears from 1.11.2000 onwards. On receipt of the lawyer's notice this defendant approached the plaintiff and the plaintiff granted one year's time to this defendant to clear the arrears of rent. That was the reason why this defendant did not send any reply to the said notice. The suit is not maintainable. This defendant is ready to pay the entire arrears within 5.10.03. The tenancy has not been validly terminated. The suit is therefore liable to be dismissed. R.S.A.No.997 of 2008 3 4. The courts below have concurrently held that the appellant/defendant was put in possession of the room as per the entrustment pleaded in the plaint, that he had kept the rent in arrears as alleged and that the tenancy was validly terminated by a notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. The Suit was accordingly decreed. 5. No questions of law, much less any substantial question of law arises for consideration in this second appeal. The questions of law formulated in the memorandum of appeal do not arise for consideration in this second appeal which is accordingly dismissed. The learned counsel for the appellant made a fervent request for time to deposit the money portion of the decree. The appellant is given two months' time from today to deposit the money portion of the decree before the trial court. Amounts, if any, already deposited by the appellant/defendant before the trial court shall be given credit to. Dated this the 24 th day of November, 2008. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj