T.CHANDRASEKHARA MENON
NARAYANAN NAIR – Appellant
Versus
PACHUMMA – Respondent
1. Both these Civil Revision Petitions arise out of proceedings for eviction of two tenants under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (hereinafter called the Act). The tenants are revision petitioners in CRP. No. 507 of 1979, while the landlords are the revision petitioners in CRP. No. 588 of 1979. The building concerned was taken on lease as per Ext. A-1 dated 9-10-1969 by the petitioners in CRP. No. 507 of 1979.1 will be referring to the parties on the basis of their position in CRP. 507 of 1979. Notice of eviction was sent on 12-7-1976, wherein it had been stated that the landlords required the building for their bona fide need. The Rent Control Court found that they did not have any bona fide need for eviction and that the 2nd petitioner was mainly depending upon the income from the schedule premises for his livelihood. However, eviction was ordered under S.11(4)(iii) of the Act holding that the 2nd petitioner was possessed of a building which was suitable for carrying on the trade, which is being conducted in the scheduled premises.
2. Appeals were taken to the Sub Court by both the landlords and the petitioners. The Sub Court reversing the decision of
AIR 1976 SC. 49; 1951 F. C. 5: AIR. 1975 SC. 1409: (1934) 294 U.S.600
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.