THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, P.B.SURESH KUMAR
Mohammed Abdullah – Appellant
Versus
M. P. Ashique – Respondent
P.B. Suresh Kumar, J.
1. Does the dismissal of a tenant’s revision under Section 20 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short, against a judgment of the Appellate Authority, deprive the landlord of the right to challenge the very same judgment of the Appellate Authority in revision, in all cases? What is the extent of effect of the doctrine of merger, if any? These are pithily, the questions raised for decision in these Rent Control Revisions.
2. The relevant facts are not in dispute. R.C.P.Nos.34 of 2003, 36 of 2003 and 38 of 2003 on the file of the Additional Rent Control Court, Kannur have been instituted in respect of different portions of a building occupied by three tenants. The landlord sought eviction of the tenants under Sections 11(2)(b), 11(3) and 11(4)(iv) of the Act. In the course of the proceedings, the landlord died. On her death, her legal representatives continued the lis as additional landlords. The case set up in the Eviction Petition was that the building is in a dilapidated condition and that it needs to be reconstructed for the occupation of one of additional landlords. The Rent Control
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.