P.GOVINDA NAIR
Antony Joseph – Appellant
Versus
Vareethu Francis – Respondent
1. The writ applicant has been thwarted in his attempt to get possession of part of the building that he rented out to the respondents. I use the word 'building' here in its ordinary sense without any reference to the definition of the term contained in S.2(1) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1959. This 'building' consists of three rooms. The writ applicant is in possession of one of those rooms. He had rented out one room to the first respondent and had also rented out the remaining one to a third party. The application for eviction was based on S.11(8) of the above Act which reads as follows:
"A landlord who is occupying only a part of a building may, apply to the Rent Control Court for an order directing any tenant occupying the whole or any portion of the remaining part of the building to put the landlord in possession thereof, if he requires additional accommodation for his personal use."
2. I must also refer to the provisos which would apply to this sub-section. These provisos are found after subjection (10) of S.11 and they read as follows:
"Provided that, in the case of an application under sub-section (8), the Rent Control Court shall reject t
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.