A.Muhamed Mustaque, J.

The issue in this Rent Control Revision revolves around the burden of proof to disentitle the landlords' claim for eviction under Section 11 (3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The landlords sought eviction under (3) of the Act to start a retail bakery business. The landlords are two brothers, along with the son of the second landlord, who is the second petitioner in the Rent Control Petition. The Rent Controller assessed the bona fide need and found that the landlords are entitled to eviction. No much argument appears to have been raised before the Rent Controller regarding the first proviso, though the tenant attempted to establish that the Rent Control Petition under (3) of the Act is hit by the first proviso. The first proviso states that the landlords are not entitled to eviction under (3) of the Act, if they are already in possession of a suitable building in the locality. The question of suitability is essentially a question of fact and would necessarily arise based on the facts disclosed in the case. There may be circumstances where the landlords suppress the fact of possessi