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 1ST SEPTEMBER 2011 / 10TH BHADRA 1933 RCRev..No. 340 of 2011() ------------------------ RCA.51/2006 of RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY THALASSERY RCP.46/2005 of RENT CONTROL COURT, KANNUR .................... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------- PATTUVAKKARAN RAMADASAN, S/O.KUNHAMBU, AGED 62 YEARS, KRIPA JEWELLERY WORKS, TALAP, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.V.RAMKUMAR NAMBIAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/PETITIONER ------------------------------------ K.P.RAJENDRAN, S/O.GOVINDAN, AGED 54 YEARS, KADAVATHU PURAYIL HOUSE, TALAP, KANNUR-670104, THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, A.C.MANU, S/O.ACHUTHAN, CHATHOTH HOUSE, KANIYAN VALAPPU, KANNUR. THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ R.C.R.No. 340 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 1st day of September, 2011 O R D E R Abdul Rehim, J. The tenant is the revision petitioner, who suffered concurrent orders of eviction passed by the Rent Control Court and the Appellate Authority on the ground contemplated under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control ) Act 1965. The Rent Control Petition was filed both under Section 11(2)(b) as well as Section 11 (3). Even though eviction was ordered on both the grounds, during pendency of the appeal, the revision petitioner/tenant had remitted the arrears of rent and got the order of eviction under Section 11(2)(b) vacated, under Section 11 (2)(c). Therefore in this revision petition the challenge is only against the order of eviction passed under sction 11 (3). 2. The landlord sought eviction urging the need for own occupation both against the revision petitioner and also against RCR.No.340/2011 2 another tenant occupying an adjacent room, on the ground that he wanted to demolish those buildings in order to construct a residential house. Before the trial court, the landlord adduced evidence through Exts.A1 to A6 and the wife of the landlord was examined as PW1. There was no evidence adduced from the side of the tenant, either oral or documentary. The Rent Control Court reposed confidence on the evidence adduced on behalf of the landlord, to hold that the need projected is genuine and bonafide . The tenant was not successful in proving his claims with respect to the benefit of the provisos to section 11 (3). 3. On a detailed appraisal of the evidence on record, the Appellate Authority concurred with the findings rendered by the Rent Control Court and confirmed the order of eviction. It was also brought to notice of the Appellate Authority that, the neighbouring premises against which eviction was sought for, had already been vacated and the landlord got possession of the said premises. 4. In the attenuated jurisdiction conferred on this court under Section 20 of the Act, we are not supposed to venture any re-appraisal of the evidence on record. However, on a perusal of RCR.No.340/2011 3 the impugned order of the Rent Control Court as well as judgment of the Appellate Authority, and on a quick reappraisal of the evidence, we do not find any irregularity, illegality or impropriety in the findings warranting interference in exercise of the revisional jurisdiction vested on this court. Accordingly, the revision petition deserves no merit and the same is hereby dismissed. After pronouncing the judgment, Sri.V.Ramkumar Nambiar, learned counsel for the revision petitioner, made an appeal to this court to allow reasonable time for the revision petitioner/tenant to vacate the tenanted premises. Considering the overall situation, we are inclined to grant a period of four months to the revision petitioner to vacate the tenanted premises. Hence, we order so. The Execution Court is directed to defer delivery of possession of the scheduled building in question, till 31/12/2011. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE. dpk RCR.No.340/2011 4