K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Puthiyedath Pakran – Appellant
Versus
Rayaroth Kunhiraman Nambiar – Respondent
Pius C. Kuriakose, J.
The present owner of the building, 2nd petitioner before the Rent Control Court and the other legal heirs of his father, 1st petitioner before the Rent Control Court are the revision petitioners. The parties will be referred to as landlord and tenant or by their ranks before the Rent Control Court. The schedule building is one of the two rooms in the ground floor of a double storeyed building situated on the principal junction of Perambra, a small town in Malabar. The petitioners sought eviction before the Rent Control Court invoking the grounds of arrears of rent [Section 11(2)(b)]. User of building in a manner as to reduce its value and utility [Section 11(4)(ii)], the tenant putting up or acquiring possession of other buildings [11(4)(iii)], cessation of occupation [Section 11(4)(v) and additional accommodation [Section 11(8)] of the Rent Control Act.
2. The Rent Control Court did not grant relief to the petitioner on any of the grounds. That Court even held the rent control petition to be not maintainable in law due to the reason that the gift deed relied on by the 2nd petitioner, the de facto claimant for the ground under Section 11(8) contained
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.