The court confirmed that landlords can evict a tenant under bona fide need as provided in Section 11(3) of the Act, contingent on fulfilling specified conditions.

A. Muhamed Mustaque, J.

The revision petitioner–tenant challenges the concurrent order of eviction under Section 11 (3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (for short, ‘the Act’). The landlords are husband and wife. The wife wants to start a garment business in the petition schedule room. The tenant is running a bakery. The wife was examined as PW1. To prove the protection under the second proviso to (3) of the Act, the landlords also examined PW2 and PW3, who are neighbouring property owners. Accordingly, the Rent Controller found that the need projected by the landlords is bona fide, and in light of the evidence adduced, it was also found that the tenant is not entitled to protection under the second proviso to (3) of the Act.

2. The Rent Control Court as well as the Rent Control Appellate Authority have appreciated the facts from the proper perspective and concluded that the landlords are entitled to eviction under Section 11 (3) of the Act. The findings of fact do not warrant interference by this Court in the exercise of its revisional jurisdiction, and the revision petition stands dismissed. However, taking note of the fervent plea made by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner–tenant, we grant six months time to vacate the building, on the following terms and conditions:

(i) An undertaking shall be filed before the Rent Control Court, within four weeks from today, that the petitioner-

tenant will vacate the building within the time granted.

(ii) The entire arrears, if any, shall be cleared within four weeks and continue to pay the monthly rent up-to-date till the actual surrender of the building.