Case: Dr. Jess Raphael Vs. Regina Joseph

The appellant took on rent the property covered by this appeal (double storeyed building) on a monthly rent of Rs. 800/for running a Nursing Home. Thefiled an eviction petition on the ground of bona fide requirement and certain other grounds like default in payment of arrears of rent. We may state that we are not concerned with any ground other than bona fide need. The Rent Controller dismissed the eviction petition holding that though the bona fides of the landlady had been established eviction could not be ordered in view of second proviso to Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, hereinafter referred to as the Act. This decision was arrived at since the tenant was dependent on his livelihood mainly on the income derived from business of Nursing Home run in the disputed premises. The appellate court dismissed the appeal of the landlady. A revision was preferred to the learned District Judge. He held that the Nursing Home run by the doctor does not fall within the meaning of the term ``business. Therefore, irrespective of the fact whether he depends on this income for his livelihood inasmuch as it is not ``business he was liable to be evicted since the bona fide need of the landlady was beyond dispute. A revision preferred by the tenant to the High Court was dismissed as not maintainable.

Reasoning:
For the application of second proviso the following two conditions are required to be satisfied in order to defeat the bona fide need of theThe tenant is dependent for his livelihood mainly on the income derived from any trade or business carried on in such aThere is no other suitable building available in the locality to carry on such trade orthis case the evidence is clear that there is no other suitable building. Equally, it is established that theis mainly dependent upon the income derived from a Nursing Home.