Back
2021 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 57457
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, M.R. ANITHA, JJ
V.M.ABDULLA KOYA – Appellant
Versus
THOPPIL IMBICHAMINABI – Respondent
O.P.(RC)NO.33 OF 2021
For the Appellants/Petitioners: V.T.MADHAVANUNNI, V.A.SATHEESH, M.S.VINEETH, M.VIVEK RABINDRANATH
For the Respondents: None
Section 12 of the Kerala Buildings Act does not apply to appeals regarding fair rent fixation, only those concerning eviction.
Headnote:(A) Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 - Sections 5, 12, and 18 - In this case, the landlord sought fixation of fair rent for a shop room, leading to a tenant's appeal which was denied on the grounds of non-payment of rent. The court clarified that Section 12 does not apply to appeals against fair rent orders under Section 5, emphasizing the limitations within eviction proceedings. The original petition was allowed, setting aside the Appellate Authority's order and dismissing the landlord's interim application as not maintainable. (Paras 1-19)
(B) Rent Control Proceedings - The court asserted that the provisions under Section 12 of the Act do not apply to petitions for fixing fair rent and reiterated that tenants must abide by final court orders on such matters. (Paras 9, 12, 18)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. tenant challenged fair rent fixation and sought rent dispute resolution. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. court considered tenant's challenges to rent demands and authority responses. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court clarified the inapplicability of eviction payment requirements to fair rent appeals. (Para 9 , 10 , 12 , 13 , 18) |
| 4. the court established binding obligations for tenants on fair rent payments. (Para 17) |
| 5. the court's order dismissing the landlord's application was upheld. (Para 19) |
JUDGMENT
Anil K. Narendran , J.
The petitioner is the respondent-tenant in R.C.P.No.193 of 2012 on the file of the Rent Control Court (Principal Munsiff- II), Kozhikode, a petition filed by the respondent herein- landlord, under Section 5 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 for fixation of fair rent of the petition schedule shop room from Rs.475/- to Rs.6,000/- per month. The Rent Control Court, by the judgment dated 28.02.2019 fixed the fair rent of the shop room as Rs.1,800/- per month, with effect from the date of petition, with 10% increase in every three years.
2. The tenant challenged the judgment of the Rent Control Court by filing R.C.A.No.85 of 2019 before the Rent Control Appellate Authority (1st Additional District Judge), Kozhikode, invoking the provisions under Section 18 (1)(b) of the Act. In that appeal, the landlord filed I.A.No.1 of 2020, invoking the provisions under Section 12 (1) and (3) of the Act, seeking an order directing the appellant-tenant to deposit enhanced rent at the rate of Rs.1,800/- per month, for the period from 10.12.2012 onwards, till date, and continues to deposit the same till the disposal of the appeal, failing which, to dismiss that appeal and put the landlord in possession of the petition schedule shop room. The affidavit dated 10.11.20120 of the landlord, filed in support of I.A.No.1 of 2020 in R.C.A.No.85 of 2019, is marked as Ext.P1.
3. The tenant filed Ext.P2 objection dated 22.12.2020 in I.A.No.1 of 2020, raising a specific contention that the provisions under Section 12 of the Act has no application in an appeal filed before the Rent Control Appellate Authority under Section 18 of the Act, challenging the judgment of the Rent Control Court fixing fair rent under Section 5 . The Rent Control Court repelled that contention, relying on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court inWilliams Daniel v. Jose [ 2019 (5) KHC 205 : 2019 (4) KLT 464 : ILR 2019 (4) Kerala 447]. By the order dated 07.01.2021, the Appellate Authority allowed I.A.No.1 of 2020 and directed the tenant to pay arrears of rent at the rate fixed by the Rent Control Court, in respect of the petition schedule shop room, at the rate of Rs.1,800/- per month (with effect from 10.12.2012), with 10% increase in every three years, up to the date of appeal, within a period of five weeks from 07.01.2021, the date of the order, and continues to pay or deposit arrears of rent which may subsequently become due in respect of that shop room, until the termination of proceedings before the Appellate Authority, within a period of three weeks from the dates on which the rent become due. Challenging the said order of the Appellate Authority, the petitioner-tenant is before this Court in this original petition, invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
4. On 26.02.2021, when this original petition came up for admission, this Court admitted the matter on file and issued notice to the respondent. This Court granted an interim order staying Ext.P3 order dated 07.01.2021 of the Appellate Authority in I.A.No.1 of 2020 in R.C.A.No.85 of 2019, for a period of four months. The said interim order is still in force, in view of the order of the Full Bench of this Court in the Suo Motu Proceedings, i.e., W.P.(C)No.11316 of 2021, extending the period of limitation, operation of interim orders, etc.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner-tenant.
Despite service of notice, n
