The procedure for payment of arrears of rent under Section 12 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, must be strictly followed before any consequences under Section 12(3) can be imposed on a defaulting tenant.

Headnote:
RENT CONTROL - SECTION 12 - PAYMENT OF ARREARS OF RENT - PROCEDURE
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a tenant, filed a Rent Control Revision challenging the order of the Rent Control Appellate Authority directing him to put the landlord in possession of the building for non-payment of arrears of rent. The petitioner contended that the procedure adopted by the Appellate Authority was contrary to the statutory mandate under Section 12 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965.
Finding of the Court:

The court held that the order of the Appellate Authority was not sustainable in law as it failed to comply with the procedure prescribed under Section 12(2) of the Act. The court noted that before the consequences contemplated under Section 12(3) of the Act could ensue, the conditions specified in Section 12(1) and (2) had to be satisfied.
Issues: Whether the procedure adopted by the Rent Control Appellate Authority in considering an application under Section 12 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, was contrary to the statutory mandate.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the provisions of Section 12 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, and the judgments of the Kerala High Court in Suvarna v. Ibrahimkutty and others and Pochappan Narayanan v. Gopalan. The court held that Section 12(1) of the Act imposes an obligation on a tenant to pay or deposit all arrears of rent admitted by him to be due in respect of the building, up to the date of payment or deposit, and continue to pay or 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, as the case may be. The court further held that before any steps could be taken under Section 12(3) for making an order against a tenant who had committed default in paying or making the deposit as contemplated by Section 12(1), the procedure prescribed by Section 12(2) had to be satisfied.
Final Decision: The court allowed the Rent Control Revision, set aside the order of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, and directed the Appellate Authority to reconsider the application under Section 12 of the Act in accordance with the law laid down by the court.

ORDER

Anil K. Narendran, J.

The petitioner is the respondent-tenant in R.C.P.No.104 of

2015 on the file of the Rent Control Court (Additional Munsiff), Kannur, a petition filed by the respondent herein-landlady under Section 11(2)(b), 11(3) and 11(4)(ii) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, seeking eviction of the tenant from the petition schedule shop room. On receipt of notice, the tenant entered appearance and filed counter statement, opposing the reliefs sought for. Before the Rent Control Court, PW1 was examined and Exts.A1 to A4 were marked on the side of the landlady. The tenant was examined as RW1 and Exts.B1 to B6 were marked on his side. The report and sketch of the Advocate Commissioner were marked as Exts.C1 and C2. After considering the pleadings and evidence on record, the Rent Control Court, by the order dated 26.07.2019, allowed R.C.P.No.104 of 2015 in part by granting an order of eviction under Section 11(3) of the Act and the tenant was directed to surrender vacant possession of the petition schedule shop room to the landlady within a period of one month, failing which she would be at liberty to execute the order through the process of court. Challenging the order of eviction granted by the Rent Control Court, the tenant filed R.C.A.No.135 of 2019 before the Rent Control Appellate Authority (Additional District Judge-II), Thalassery, invoking the provisions under Section 18(1)(b) of the Act. In that Rent Control Appeal, the landlady filed I.A.No.1 of 2020, an application under Section 12 of the Act, seeking an order directing the tenant to pay the admitted arrears of rent. In that application, the Appellate Authority passed an order dated 31.10.2022. The reasoning of the Appellate Authority in the order dated 31.10.2022 and also its operative portion read thus; “In the case on hand, the admitted arrears is paid only upto and inclusive of the month of May, 2022. Admittedly, the rent thereafter is in arrears and the tenant failed to pay or deposit the same. No sufficient cause to the contrary is shown by the tenant. Therefore, this application is allowable.

In the result, I.A.No.1 of 2020 is allowed. The tenant is directed to put the landlord in possession of the building forthwith.”

Based on the said order dated 31.10.2022, the Appellate Authority stopped further proceedings in R.C.A.No.135 of 2019, by the judgment dated 31.10.2022. Paragraph 7 and also the operative portion of that judgment reads thus;

“7. In case on hand, the admitted arrears is paid only upto and inclusive of the month of May, 2022. Admittedly, the rent thereafter is in arrears and the tenant failed to pay or deposit the same. No sufficient cause to the contrary is shown by the tenant. Therefore, I.A.No.1 of 2020 is allowed.

In the result, all further proceedings in the R.C.A.No.135 of 2019 is stopped. The tenant/appellant is directed to put the landlord/respondent in possession of the building forthwith.”

Feeling aggrieved, the tenant is before this Court in this Rent Control Revision, invoking the provisions under Section 20 of the Act. 2. On 12.12.2022, when this Rent Control Revision came up for admission, this Court issued notice before admission to the respondent. In I.A.No.2 of 2022 this Court granted an interim order staying the judgment dated 31.10.2022 in R.C.A.No.135 of 2019 and also the order dated 26.07.2019 in R.C.P.No.104 of 2015 for a period of one month. The said interim order was extended till

09.01.2023 by the order dated 05.01.2023.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner-tenant and also the learned counsel for the respondent-landlady.

4. The issue that arises for consideration in this Rent Control Revision is as to whether the order dated 31.10.2022 of the Rent Control Appellate Authority in I.A.No.1 of 2020 in R.C.A.No.135 of 2019 and also the consequential judgment dated 31.10.2022 in R.C.A.No.135 of 2019 can be sustained in law.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner-tenant would rely on the ju

Click Here to Read the rest of this document