Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JJ.
M/s Greenix Ventures Pvt. Ltd. – Petitioner
Versus
P.M. Salim S/o Late P.K. Muhammed Kutty – Respondent
R.C. Revision Nos. 147, 151 of 2022
Decided On : 01-09-2022
Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 - Section 12(3), 20, 11(2)(b), 11(3), 12(3), 18 - Objection in the Rent Control Petition - Rent Control Revisions, filed under Section 20 of Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, arise out of judgment of Rent Control Appellate Authority (Additional District Judge-VI), in R.C.A. filed against order of Rent Control Court (Additional Munsiff) - Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority, as case may be, should normally adjourn hearing of case to a date beyond date fixed for deposit, thereby allowing reasonable time to tenant to show sufficient cause for not depositing admitted arrears of rent, if he has committed default in payment of admitted arrears of rent.
Findings of the Court:
In an order passed under Section 12(3) of the Act, which is one passed on being satisfied that tenant has not shown sufficient cause for non-payment of admitted arrears of rent, in terms of order under Section 12(1) and (2) of Act, Rent Control Court or Appellate Authority cannot enlarge time limit originally granted for payment of admitted arrears of rent, invoking provisions under Section 23(1)(i), Court find no merits in contention of tenants that, in view of the provisions under Section 23(1)(i) of Act, Appellate Authority cannot be found fault with in granting tenants three months' time to comply with the direction contained in order of Rent Control Court to pay admitted arrears of rent, either in lump or in installments.
Results: Appeal dismissed.
ORDER :
1. These Rent Control Revisions, i.e. R.C. Rev. No. 147 of 2022 and R.C. Rev. No. 151 of 2022, filed under Section 20 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, arise out of the judgment dated 04.07.2022 of the Rent Control Appellate Authority (Additional District Judge-VI), Ernakulam in R.C.A. No. 5 of 2022, filed against the order dated 22.11.2021 of the Rent Control Court (Additional Munsiff), Kochi in R.C.P. No. 17 of 2019. Since common issues are raised, these Rent Control Revisions are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
2. The petitioners in R.C. Rev. No. 147 of 2022 are the petitioners-landlords in R.C.P. No. 17 of 2019 on the file of the Rent Control Court, Kochi, which was one filed against the petitioners in R.C. Rev. No. 151 of 2022, who are the tenants, seeking an order of eviction under Sections 11(2)(b) and 11(3) of the Act. The tenants entered appearance and filed an objection in the Rent Control Petition. The landlords filed I.A. No. 4 of 2020, an application under Section 12 of the Act, seeking an order directing the tenants to deposit admitted arrears of rent. In that interlocutory application, the tenants filed a counter, contending that the monthly rent of the tenanted premises is only Rs. 1,60,000/- and not Rs. 1,83,000/- as claimed by the landlords. Admittedly, the tenants have not paid any amount towards monthly rent from January, 2020 onwards, even at the rate of Rs. 1,60,000/-. After considering the rival contentions, the Rent Control Court passed an order dated 30.01.2021 in I.A. No. 4 of 2020, under Section 12(1) and (2) of the Act, whereby the tenants were directed to pay admitted arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 20,80,000/- for the period from 01.01.2020 till 30.01.2021, at the rate of Rs. 1,60,000/- per month, on or before 30.03.2021. The tenants have not chosen to pay or deposit the admitted arrears of rent. No petition was filed for enlargement of time for paying admitted arrears of rent. Therefore, the Rent Control Court passed an order dated 31.03.2021, under Section 12(3) of the Act, whereby the tenants were directed to vacate the petition schedule building and put the landlords in possession of that building.
3. The tenants filed I.A. No. 6 of 2021 seeking an order to review the order dated 30.01.2021 in I.A. No. 4 of 2020. That application was allowed on 27.08.2021 and the tenants were granted two weeks’ time to show cause as to why an order under Section 12(3) of the Act shall not be passed against them. On 13.10.2021 the matter was adjourned to 16.10.2021 and thereafter to 28.10.2021. On 28.10.2021 the matter was adjourned to 22.11.2021. The tenants did not pay or deposit the admitted arrears of rent. They failed to show sufficient cause for non-payment of admitted arrears of rent. Therefore, the Rent Control Court passed the order dated 22.11.2021 in R.C.P. No. 17 of 2019, under Section 12(3) of the Act, whereby the tenants were directed to vacate the petition schedule building and put the landlords in possession of that building.
4. The order dated 22.11.2021 of the Rent Control Court in R.C.P. No. 17 of 2019 was under challenge in R.C.A. No. 5 of 2022 filed by the tenants before the Rent Control Appellate Authority (Additional District Judge-VI), Ernakulam. That appeal ended in dismissal by the judgment dated 04.07.2022. In the said judgment, the Appellate Authority noticed that the tenants have no case that they have paid any amount towards rent to the landlords after the filing of the Rent Control Petition, which is one filed on 01.10.2019. The tenants have also not produced any receipts or documents to prove the payment of rent during the pendency of the Rent Control Petition. Therefore, it is evident that the tenants have not paid to the landlords the rent admitted by them in their counter to I.A. No. 4 of 2020 in R.C.P. No. 17 of 2019. From the available evidence, the Appellate Authority found that during the period from 01.01.2020
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.
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....
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....
In exercise of the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
Point of Law - Power to do justice between the parties and to dispose of a Rent Control Petition in accordance with law, would certainly confer certain inherent powers on the Rent Control Court.
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....
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....
An application under Section 12(1) of the Rent Control Act is maintainable in an appeal against an order passed under Section 12(3), confirming tenant obligations for rent during eviction proceedings....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
