Court affirmed that the landlord-tenant relationship persisted despite a sale agreement during the tenancy, emphasizing the obligation to pay rent.

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 24^th day of February, 2026 Soumen Sen , C.J .

We have heard Mr. N. Sasi, learned counsel for the peti-

tioner and Mr. Rajesh R. Kormath, learned counsel for the re-

spondent.

2. This revision is arising out of an order passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority on 10.04.2025 in R.C.A. No.21 of 2024, which in turn arose from an order passed by the Rent Control Court, Manjeri in R.C.P. No.2 of 2024. The issue consid- ered in the appeal was whether a landlord-tenant relationship subsists between the parties, having regard to an agreement for sale executed during the continuance of such relationship. In- terestingly, the appellant has filed a suit for return of the sale consideration, which itself indicates that the petitioner is not willing to have the property conveyed in his favour under the agreement for sale. This conduct demonstrates that there was no transformation of the pre-existing landlord-tenant relation-

ship.

3. The issue with regard to the landlord and tenant was con- sidered in the earlier round of litigation in a proceeding under Section 12 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act , 1965. The learned counsel for the landlord–respondent has placed reliance on the order passed in the eviction proceedings in R.C.P. No. 2 of 2024, wherein the very same issue came up for consideration. The learned Rent Control Court, Manjeri, after adverting to the agreement in question, held that the petitioner ₹

is liable to pay monthly rent at the rate of 25,000/- per month as evidenced by Ext. A1. Consequently, the present petitioner ₹

was directed to deposit a sum of 7,25,000/- towards arrears of rent, subject to other consequential adjustments.

4. It is pointed out that the application for review of the said order was dismissed on 17.07.2025 and that no appeal has been preferred against the original order dated 29.05.2025. It further appears that, on 17.07.2025, an order was passed di- recting the respondent to put the petitioner in possession of the petition schedule building, in view of the failure on the part of the present petitioner to deposit the admitted arrears of rent as directed in I.A. No. 3 of 2024.

5. In view of the aforesaid, we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority on 10.04.2025. The Trial Court Records shall be returned forth-

with.

6. The revision petition is disposed of.

Sd/-