IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Anil K. Narendran, P.G. Ajithkumar, JJ.
Nandanam Tiles & Sanitaries (P) Ltd. - Appellant
Vs.
Abdul Gaffur, S/O Puthiyaveettil Muhammed - Respondent
O.P.(RC)NO.107 OF 2022
Decided On : 02-06-2022
Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 - Section 11(2)(b)- Arrears of rent – Order to deposit – Challenged - supervisory jurisdiction cannot be exercised to correct all errors of the order or judgment of a lower court or tribunal, acting within the limits of its jurisdiction. [Para 28]
Finding of the Court:
Correctional jurisdiction under Article 227 can be exercised only in a case where the order or judgment of a lower court or tribunal has been passed in grave dereliction of duty or in flagrant abuse of fundamental principles of law or justice. Therefore, no interference under Article 227 is called for, unless the High Court finds that the lower court or tribunal has committed manifest error, or the reasoning is palpably perverse or patently unreasonable, or the decision of the lower court or tribunal is in direct conflict with settled principles of law or where there has been gross and manifest failure of justice or the basic principles of natural justice have been flouted.
Result: Petition dismissed
JUDGMENT :
Anil K. Narendran, J.
The petitioner is the respondent-tenant in R.C.P.No.2 of 2020 on the file of the Rent Control Court (Munsiff) Kodungallur, a petition filed by the respondent herein-landlord under Section 11(2)(b) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, seeking eviction of the tenant on the ground of arrears of rent to the tune of Rs.23,05,577/- in respect of the petition schedule building, from the month of March 2019 onwards. During the pendency of that Rent Control Petition, the landlord filed I.A No.1 of 2020, an application under Section 12 of the Act seeking an order directing the tenant to deposit Rs.29,07,975/- towards the arrears of rent. In that interlocutory application, the tenant submitted objections. He raised the contention that the landlord had purchased articles worth Rs.26,00,000/- on credit, agreeing to adjust the value of the same towards the rent payable at the rate of Rs.1,44,500/- per month. The tenant has also contented that Rs.25,00,000/- has already been paid to the landlord towards the security deposit. Still the same is with the landlord, which has to be adjusted towards arrears. The Rent Control Court, after considering the materials on record, passed Ext.P4 order, in exercise of its powers under Section 12(1) of the Act, whereby the tenant was directed to deposit the admitted arrears of rent on or before 31.05.2022. The said order reads thus:
Challenging the said order of the Rent Control Court, the petitioner-tenant is before this Court with this original petition, invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner-tenant.
3. The issue that arises for consideration in this original petition is as to whether any interference is warranted on Ext.P4 order dated 01.04.2022 by the Rent Control Court in I.A. No.1 of 2020 in R.C.P.No.2 of 2020 invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
4. Section 12 of the Act deals with payment or deposit of rent during the pendency of proceedings for eviction. As per Section 12(1), no tenant against whom an application for eviction has been made by a landlord under Section 11, shall be entitled to contest the application before the Rent Control Court under that Section, or to prefer an appeal under Section 18 against any order made by the Rent Control Court on the application, unless he has paid or pays to the landlord, or deposits with the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority, as the case may be, all arrears of rent admitted by the tenant to be due in respect of the building up to the date of payment or deposit, and continues to pay or to deposit any rent which may subsequently become due in respect of the building, until the termination of the proceedings before the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority,
Issac Ninan v. State of Kerala
Santhosh K. Thomas v. Usha Suresh
G. Reghunathan v. K.V. Varghese (2005) 7 SCC 317
Edger Ferus v. Abraham Ittycheria
Shalini Shyam Shetty v. Rajendra Shankar Patil (2010) 8 SCC 329
Jai Singh v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi (2010) 9 SCC 385
K.V.S. Ram v. Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation (2015) 12 SCC 39
Sobhana Nair K.N. v. Shaji S.G. Nair
Gopala Panicker Baiju and another v. Mallika
Bhaskaran Assan v. Ammukutty Amma
In exercise of the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
Point of law: Power of superintendence conferred upon the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India over all courts and Tribunals throughout the territory of the State is both of admi....
When Section 8(1) of the Act is not in Statute book, as it was declared ultra vires, a tenant is entitled to contend that the landlord is not entitled to retain the advance in excess of one month's r....
Court cannot sit in appeal over the findings recorded by the lower court or tribunal and the jurisdiction of this Court is only supervisory in nature and not that of an appellate court.
Arrears of rent - In order to contest an application for eviction before the Rent Control Court or to prefer an appeal under Section 18 of the Act against any order made on such application, such a t....
High Court could not have re-appreciated the evidence and the concurrent findings rendered by the courts below ought not to have been interfered with by the High Court while exercising revisional jur....
Even assuming that for purpose of execution an order under Section 12(3) of Act can be equated with and treated as same, as one under Section 11 of Act, the consequence enjoined by an order under Sec....
Tenants must deposit admitted rent during eviction proceedings under crisis; failure leads to automatic eviction unless sufficient cause is shown.
Point of Law : Eviction or tenancy matters governed by special Statutes and where the tenant enjoys statutory protection, only the specified Court has been conferred jurisdiction.
Point of Law : Only thing is that the opportunity to be afforded to the tenant to show sufficient cause with respect to the failure to pay or deposit rent, as directed in Section 12(1) and (2), withi....
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.