Sankaran, J.

The landlords are the revision petitioners. They filed the Rent Control Petition under Sections 11(2)(b), 11(3) and 11(4)(i) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act’). The Rent Control Court dismissed the Rent Control Petition on all grounds. On appeal, the decision of the Rent Control Court was confirmed by the Appellate Authority.

2. The building belonged to late Alexander, the predecessor in interest of the petitioners. The building was leased out to the first respondent. Whether there was any rent deed is not clear and no party has produced any rent deed.

3. According to the petitioners, the monthly rent fixed was Rs.250/-. It was agreed that the tenant shall not sub-lease the building without the consent of the landlord. Rent was kept in arrears from 1.1.1988 onwards. The first respondent sub-let the building without the knowledge or consent of the landlord to the second respondent. Ext.A2 lawyer notice dated 7.12.1992 was issued to the first respondent demanding arrears of rent and termination of sub-lease. The notice was returned unclaimed as evidenced by Ext.A1. It was alleged that the petitioners bonafi