A tenant's right to contest an eviction is conditional on timely rent payment as mandated by the Rent Control Act.

This Rent Control Revision is filed by the tenant in R.C.P.

No. 52/2022 on the file of the Rent Control Court, Thiruvananthapuram, who is the appellant in R.C.A. No. 6/2025 before the Additional Rent Control Appellate Authority–V, Thiruvananthapuram.

2. The aforesaid R.C.P. was filed by the respondent herein, the landlord, under Sections 11 (2)(b) and 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act , 1965 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rent Control Act”), seeking eviction of the tenant. During the pendency of the Rent Control Petition, the Rent Control Court passed an order under Section 12 (1) of the Act directing the tenant to deposit the admitted arrears of rent and to continue to deposit the rent that may subsequently become due in respect of the tenanted building.

3. However, the tenant failed to comply with the said direction within the time stipulated in the order. Consequently, the Rent Control Court passed an order of summary eviction under Section 12 (3) of the Rent Control Act. Aggrieved by the said order, the tenant preferred an appeal before the Rent Control Appellate Authority as R.C.A. No. 6/2025. The appeal was dismissed by judgment dated 25.11.2025. Challenging the said judgment, the present Revision Petition has been filed.

4. While considering whether any interference is warranted with the order passed by the Rent Control Court under Section 12 (3) of the Rent Control Act, as confirmed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority, it is relevant to note that of the Act mandates that a tenant shall not be entitled to contest an eviction proceeding unless he deposits the admitted arrears of rent due in respect of the building up to the date of payment and continues to pay or deposit the rent that may subsequently become due until the termination of the proceedings before the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority, as the case may be.

5. In the present case, both the Rent Control Court and the Appellate Authority have concurrently found that the arrears of rent were admitted by the tenant. A perusal of the orders passed by the authorities below reveals that such a finding was arrived at on the basis of the pleadings and materials placed before them by both parties.

6. Although the tenant/revision petitioner contended before the Appellate Authority that the non-payment of rent was due to the reluctance of the landlord to receive the same, the said contention was rightly negatived on the ground that the tenant failed to produce any material to substantiate the said claim. We are also of the view that if the landlord was unwilling to receive the admitted arrears of rent, it was always open to the tenant to deposit the same before the court. Therefore, the contention that the arrears of rent were not paid due to the landlord’s refusal to accept the same is unsustainable.

7. It is also apposite to note that in the order of summary eviction passed under Section 12 (3) of the Act, the Rent Control Court has specifically observed that instead of furnishing any explanation for the non-compliance with the order directing payment of admitted arrears of rent, the tenant chose to file an interlocutory application seeking review of the said order. A conjoint reading of the orders passed by the Rent Control Court and the Appellate Authority clearly indicates that the non-payment of the admitted arrears of rent by the tenant was deliberate, particularly in view of the absence of any convincing explanation for such non-

compliance.

8. Therefore, it cannot be said that the order of summary eviction passed by the Rent Control Court under Section 12 (3) of the Rent Control Act in R.C.P. No. 52/2022, which now stands confirmed by the Appellate Authority by judgment dated 25.11.2025 in R.