Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 17TH JYAISHTA, 1945 RCREV. NO. 90 OF 2023 AGAINST THE ORDER IN RCA 7 & 10 /2022 OF THE RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY (III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT)PALAKKAD DATED 21.3.2023 ORDER IN RCP 26/2021 OF RENT CONTROL COURT (ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF) PALAKKAD DATED 17.6.2022 PETITIONER IN RCR/APPELLANT IN RCA/RESPONDENT IN IA/ RESPONDENT IN RCP DHANYA JOSE, AGED 31 YEARS W/O RAJESH, KOCHUKUDIIYIL, CHEKKODE, PULLAMKKODE P.O, MALAPPURAM TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 676525 BY ADVS.
SABU GEORGE P.B.KRISHNAN P.B.SUBRAMANYAN MANU VYASAN PETER RESPONDENT IN RCR/RESPONDENT IN RCA / APPLICANT IN IA/PETITIONER IN RCP:
PRAKASH RAMACHANDRAN,AGED 47 YEARS S/O RAMACHANDRAN, RESIDING AT DEVI HOUSE, 17/78(1), CHITTUR ROAD, MANAPPULLIKAVU, KUNNANUR AMSOM, KUNNATHURMEDU, P.O, PALAKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678013 BY ADVS.
V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR RENJITH THAMPAN (SR.)(K/276/1990) THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Rc Rev.90 of 2023 2 A.K. JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR & MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., JJ …...................................................
RC(Rev.)No.90 of 2023 …..............................................................
Dated this the 7th day of June, 2023 ORDER Mohammed Nias. C.P. J.
The tenant, the respondent in RCP No.26 of 2021, challenges the judgments of the appellate authority in RCA No.7 of 2022 and 10 of 2022, confirming the orders passed by the Rent Control Court under Section 12(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').
2. RCP No.26 of 2021 was filed by the landlord, respondent herein, under Sections 5 and 11(2)(b) of the Act. Landlord filed IA No. 157 of 2022 to direct the tenant to deposit the admitted arrears of rent and interest for the period from April 2020 to December 2021. The Rent Control Court, as per its order dated 17.06.2022, allowed IA No.157 of 2022, finding that an amount of Rs.12,01,491/- is due to the landlord as admitted arrears of rent for the above said period and directed the tenant to deposit the above-admitted arrears of rent within 22.07.2022, further ordering that in default the further proceedings in RCP 26 of 2021 will be stopped and the tenant shall put the landlord in possession of the
Rc Rev.90 of 2023 3 building. The tenant did not comply with the said order, and thereafter by order dated 23.07.2022, finding that the earlier order directing the arrears of rent was not complied with and that the tenant did not show any sufficient cause, all further proceedings in the Rent Control Petition were stopped, and the tenant was directed to put the landlord in possession of the petition schedule building under Section 12(3) of the Act.
3. RCA 7/2022 is an appeal filed against the order dated 17.6.2022 in IA 157 of 2022 under Section 12(1 and (2) of the Act, and RCA 10 of 2022 is the appeal filed by the tenant against the order dated 23.7.2022 in RCP dated 26 of 2021.
4. In the appeal, the tenant contended that there are no admitted arrears of rent. He had not filed any objection to the application under Section 12 of the Act, and only an objection to the Rent Control Petition was filed, stating that there is no rent in arrears. The appellate court found that the rent agreement would reveal that the rent agreed by the parties is Rs.74,000/- per month. The tenant used the building for conducting home appliances business in a busy locality in Palakkad town.
In such circumstances, the courts below took the rent fixed in the agreement dated 12.7.2013 as the admitted rent. The tenant also contended that the landlord did not issue any receipt of payment of rent, which was not accepted by the court below, as the tenant did not take recourse to Section 9(2) of the Act by depositing the rent or sending it
Rc Rev.90 of 2023 4 through a money order. The appellate court found that the tenant has GST registration for the business and must certainly be keeping books of accounts which would also reflect the payment of rent as an item of expenditure apart from showing the rate of rent. The tenant's contention that he was not given an opportunity to file a counter was found to be wrong as the petition was repeatedly posted for counter, which the tenant did not avail of, and the appellate court found no reason to interfere with the order under Section 12(1) of the Act. Secondly, the appellate court considered the fact that the tenant did not pay or deposit the admitted arrears of rent within the time specified or showed any sufficient cause for not paying the rent. In such circumstances, the Rent Control Court passed the second under Section 11(3) of the Act. The appellate court took note of the law that the Rent Control Court need not alert the tenant to show cause before passing an eviction for non-payment of admitted arrears of rent. It was open for the tenant to show cause, and that not having been done, the order under Section 12(3) cannot be faulted, and the trial court order was upheld.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondent.
Having heard the learned counsel on either side and perusing the available records, we are not in a position to accept the arguments on the side of the revision petitioner. The landlord-tenant relationship is not disputed. The agreement showing the rate of rent is also not disputed, and
Rc Rev.90 of 2023 5 the plea of discharge by the tenant was not proved in spite of the court below passing an order under Section 12(1) of the Act. The tenant did not pay or deposit the rent. The tenant also did not show cause for non- compliance of the order. We also find that the tenant was granted sufficient opportunity to file objection to the petitions, which the tenant did not avail. In such circumstances, the tenant who got time between the first and the second order and not having done anything which the Act requires cannot complain about the order impugned in this revision being wrong either on facts or on law. We do not find anything illegal, improper, or irregular in the orders passed by the courts below. There is no merit in the revision, and the same is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/- A.K. JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE
Sd/-MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
JUDGE dlk/13.6.2023