T.CHANDRASEKHARA MENON
ABDUREHIM SAIT – Appellant
Versus
SAHUL HAMEED – Respondent
1. This Civil Revision Petition arises out of a proceeding for eviction under S.11 (4) (i) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, the Act for short. The landlord the applicant for eviction is the revision petitioner. Two grounds were taken for eviction, one the tenant had kept the rent in arrears and two, he had sub-let the premises to another who was carrying on tobacco business in the premises for which he had obtained a licence from the Central Excise Authority, marked as Ext. A2 in the case I might first note that the question of arrears of rent does not now arise. The Rent Controller had come to the conclusion that there was no arrears of rent and the tenant subsequently also was paying the rent so that neither before the Appellate Authority nor before the Revisional Authority under the Act, that question did not come into the tore.
2. In the objection the tenant had filed (he had filed the same along with the sub-lessee whip was the second counter petitioner before the Rent Controller's Court) it had been stated that he was conducting the business in the : remises from 1-3-1963 in the name of Hameed and Company, on the request of the petitioner
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.