Back
A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
A. T. Joy – Appellant
Versus
P. K. Sreenivasan – Respondent
ORDER :
Shoba Annamma Eapen J.
The tenants are the revision petitioners. They filed these revision petitions under Section 20 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (for short, “the Act”), challenging the common judgment dated 30.11.2018 of the Rent Control Appellate Authority (Additional District Judge-I), Ernakulam in R.C.A.Nos.5 and 6 of 2017. As per the said judgment, the Appellate Authority confirmed the orders of eviction granted by the III Additional Munsiff and Rent Control Court, Ernakulam, in favour of the respondent-landlord under Section 11(3) of the Act.
2. Rent control petitions were filed by the respondent/landlord under Sections 11(3) and 11(8) of the Act. I.A.No.6526/2016 was filed for joint trial of the rent control petitions and since the contentions of the petitioners in both the petitions were on similar lines, the petitions were tried jointly. The landlord is the owner of a two storeyed building by name 'Sooraj Building' at Mathrubhumi junction at Kaloor and the rent control petitions were filed for eviction of the two rooms on the ground floor, which are adjacent premises, for the bona fide need of the dependent son of the landlord to start a
Bona fide need is not synonymous to dire need or necessity or a mere whim or fancy.
'Propriety' does not confer power upon High Court to re-appreciate evidence to come to a different conclusion, but its consideration of evidence is confined to find out legality, regularity and propr....
Burden of proof in eviction cases lies with both parties to establish arrears or genuine need.
Point of Law : Though the revisional power under Section 20 of the Act may be wider than Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 it cannot be equated even with the second appellate power con....
Landlords' bonafide need for eviction under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act, 1965 must be supported by evidence of genuine intent and financial capability.
The burden of proof under the second proviso to Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act rests entirely on the tenant, requiring satisfactory evidence of both livelihood dep....
The burden of proof to establish the protection under the 2nd proviso to Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, rests strictly with the tenant, requiring satisfacto....
Landlords must prove bona fide need for eviction; tenants' failure to substantiate claims regarding income and available premises supports eviction orders under the Rent Control Act.
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
