Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, HARISANKAR V. MENON, JJ.
P.N.Unnikrishnan, S/o. P.C.Narayana Marar - Appellant
Versus
K.X.John Victor, S/o. Late Xavier - Respondent
RCREV. No. 109 of 2025
Decided on : 23-08-2025
Key Points: - The Act requires a two-stage process: first decide if the tenant is liable to pay arrears under Section 12(1); if liable and not deposited, proceed to Section 12(3) to consider sufficient cause for non-deposit. (!) - The doctrine of suspension of rent can be invoked when the landlord’s acts substantially interfere with possession or enjoyment, including partial or total deprivation, leading to possible rent suspension or abatement; mere allegations without bona fide grounds are insufficient. (!) (!) (!) - The court emphasizes cautious application of suspension, ensuring it does not prejudice the tenant’s right to defend on genuine triable issues, and that suspension does not extinguish liability but may defer it. (!) (!) - Interference by the landlord, such as obstruction to access or services, can lead to suspension or proportionate abatement of rent depending on extent of deprivation. (!) (!) (!) - A prior remand order challenging Section 12(3) proceedings can be perverse and outside the scope of Section 12, affecting the propriety of considering fresh evidence at that stage. (!) - The tenant’s failure to deposit admitted arrears leads to dismissal of revision; however, sufficient cause may defer the final order under Section 12(3) without negating liability. (!) (!)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. review of eviction proceedings due to rent arrears. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. tenant's attempts to dispute rent payment. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. analysis of section 12 of the rent control act. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 21) |
| 4. conditions for invoking the doctrine of suspension of rent. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 20) |
| 5. judicial interpretations of suspension of rent. (Para 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 6. conclusion and refusal of appeal certificate. (Para 22) |
ORDER :
A.Muhamed Mustaque, J.
In this revision filed under Section 20 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by the tenant, we are called upon to decide the legality of an order passed under Section 12(3) of the Act.
2. In R.C.P. No. 134/2021, the landlord sought eviction of the tenant on the grounds of arrears of rent, bona fide requirement, and cessation of occupation. During the pendency of the proceedings, the landlord filed I.A. No.3/2021 before the Rent Control Court, Ernakulam, seeking a direction to the tenant to deposit arrears of rent up to 05/10/2021, along with the arrears towards TDS. The said application, filed on 25/10/2021, was resisted by the tenant. The tenant contended that he was unable to clear the arrears due to the adverse impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and, further, owing to acts of interference on the part of the landlord. It was specifically alleged that the landlord had locked the premises, disconnected the electricity supply, and cut off the water connection, thereby rendering it impossible for the tenant to run his business.
3. The Rent Controller, however, passed an order on 10/06/2022 in I.A.No.3/2021 in R.C.P. No. 134/2021, directing the tenant to pay the rent arrears from 01/07/2020 to 01/08/2021, excluding the rent paid for the months of October 2020 and March 2021, and further directing them to remit the rent from September 2021 onwards. There was also a direction to remit the rent subsequently fallen due, within 15 days from the date of the order till the culmination of the rent control proceedings. The rate of rent payable was Rs. 1,20,000/-per month.
4. Under the statutory provision, the tenant will have to discharge the arrears of rent within four weeks. If no sufficient cause is shown, an order has to be passed by the Authority stopping all further proceedings and issuing an order directing the tenant to put the building in possession of the landlord.
5. The tenant did not pay the arrears instead filed the I.A.No. 7/2022 in I.A. No. 3/2021 in R.C.P. No. 134/2021. The tenant filed I.A. No. 7/2022, stating that he shall be allowed to produce materials and adduce evidence to establish that he has no liability to pay rent as claimed under the petition under Section 12(1) of the Rent Control Act.
6. The Rent Controller finally passed an order on 22/07/2022 under Section 12(3) by dismissing I.A. No. 7/2022 and ordering the tenant to put the landlord in possession. The Rent Controller noted that no arrears have been cleared as ordered by the Rent Controller on 10/06/2022.
7. The tenant appealed against the order in I.A. Nos. 3/2021 and 7/2022 before the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Ernakulam, in R.C.A No. 44/2022. By an order dated 21/11/2022, the order in I.A. No.3/2021 was not set aside by the Appellate Authority, and the order in I.A. No.7/2022 was set aside, directing the Rent Control Court to give an opportunity to the tenant to adduce brief evidence.
8. After the remand, the tenant adduced evidence. Exhibits A1 to A14 were marked on the side of the landlord. Exts. B1 to B8 were marked on the side of the tenant. The Commission Reports were also marked as C1 to C3. Oral evidence was also adduced on the side of the landlord and tenant.
9. Based on the oral evidence and materials produced, the Rent Controller came to a definite conclusion that the tenant could not enjoy the building due to the obstruction caused by the landlord and therefore, sufficient cause has been shown for non-remittan
AI
The tenant's liability to pay rent prevails despite claims of interference by the landlord, and the doctrine of suspension of rent was not applicable without sufficient cause for non-payment.
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 application under Section 12(1) of the Rent Control Act is maintainable in appeals against orders under Section 12(3), overruling previous decisions that restricted its applicability.
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....
A tenant's right to contest an eviction is conditional on timely rent payment as mandated by the Rent Control Act.
A tenant's failure to deposit admitted rent arrears under the Rent Control Act justifies eviction proceedings.
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....
Rent Control disputes require determination of tenant-landlord relationships before enforcing payment orders.
The court reaffirmed that claims of rent payment require substantiation through evidence, especially post-advisory orders on rent payment.
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
