A Claim petitioner, who resisted the orders of eviction passed in a rent control proceedings, is the appellant herein. Her claim was turned down by the two courts below, the execution court and also the lower appellate court. Order of eviction was passed against the tenant, who was none other than the son of the claim petitioner, on grounds under Section 11(2)(b) and Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, hereinafter referred to as the “BRC’ Act. That was an ex parte order. Admittedly, the tenant proceeded against, at the time of the prosecution of the rent control petition, and even now, is employed in a gulf country. Service of notice was affected at the leased premises and also by publication in a national daily having circulation in the gulf countries. When the order was put in execution by the landlord/respondent, filing an execution petition, a claim petition was filed by the appellant herein contending that she is having possession over the leased premises and that she is operating a commercial fund in such premises. After the claim being enquired into, the execution court finding no merit in the claim set up to resist the evictio