T.K Narayanan vs K.M.Balakrishnan

Kerala High Court

T.K Narayanan vs K.M.Balakrishnan on 22 May, 2024

Author: Amit Rawal

Bench: Amit Rawal

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
                                    &
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
      WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MAY 2024 / 1ST JYAISHTA, 1946
                         RCREV. NO. 94 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 05.01.2024 IN RCA NO.17 OF 2020
OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC)-II, KALPETTA ARISING OUT OF
THE   ORDER/JUDGMENT   DATED   17.02.2014   IN   RCP   NO.28   OF   2014   OF
MUNSIFF MAGISTRATE, SULTHAN BATHERI
REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:

            T.K NARAYANAN
            AGED 71 YEARS
            S/O CHATHUKUTTY, AGED 71 YEARS,
            RESIDING AT THALIKKANDY HOUSE,
            S.BATHERY AMSOM AND DESOM, S.BATHERY TALUK,
            WAYANAD DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 673592

            BY ADVS.
            AMITH KRISHNAN H.
            GOWRI DEV
            P.DEVIKRISHNA
            B.G.HARINDRANATH (SR.)(K/378/1984)



RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:

            K.M.BALAKRISHNAN
            AGED 86 YEARS
            S/O KUNHIRAMAN NAIR, AGRICULTURIST, AGED 86,
            SECRETARY, BATHERY MAHA GANAPATHI KSHETRA SAMITHI,
            MAHA GANAPATHI KSETRA SAMITHI OFFICE, S.BATHERY PO,
            S.BATHERY AMSOM AND DESOM, S.BATHERY TALUK,
            WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 673592


      THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 RCREV. NO. 94 OF 2024
                                  2


                               ORDER

Amit Rawal, J.

1. Present Revision petition is directed against concurrent finding of Rent Controller and Appellate Authority whereby eviction of petitioner/tenant has been ordered and upheld on the ground of ceases to occupy.

2. Respondent/landlord instituted a petition seeking eviction of petitioner/tenant on the ground specified under Section 11(4)(V), ceased to occupy. The aforementioned petition was filed in 2014 alleging that tenant had ceased to occupy petition scheduled building from July, 2013. Petitioner/tenant appeared and denied all allegations, much less raised dispute with regard to the locus standi of respondent/landlord. Since parties were at variance, learned Rent Controller framed the following issues:

(i) Had the tenant ceased to occupy petition schedule shop room for 6 months without any reasonable cause ?

(ii) Is the petitioner entitled to get an order directing RCREV. NO. 94 OF 2024 3 the respondent to hand over the vacant possession of the petition schedule shop room u/s 11(4) (V) of the Act ?

(iii) Relief and Costs ?

3. Respondent/landlord examined five witnesses and brought on record certain documents; similarly petitioner/tenant also,details of which are given below:

Petitioner's Witness:

PW1 - 20.02.2018 - K.M. Balakrishnan PW2 - 24.07.2019 - K. Rajan PW3 - 24.07.2019 - Radhakrishnan T. PW4 - 30.07.2019 - Surendran PW5 - 07.08.2019 - Sajith Babu Petitioner's Exhibits:

A1 - 05.07.1972 - Certified copy of Registration Certificate.

          A2      - 21.10.1977     - Agreement.
          A3      - 31.03.2015     - Audit Report.
          A4      - 25.05.2012     - Copy of minutes.
          A5      - 23.06.2015     - Ownership Certificate.
          A6      - 19.10.2015     - Reply of Right to
                                     Information Act issued

by Senior Superintendent, K.S.E.B, RCREV. NO. 94 OF 2024 4 Sulthanbathery (east).

A7 - 17.01.2014 - Building Tax Receipt. A8 - 19.02.2013 - Building Tax Receipt. A9 - 07.03.2011 - Building Tax Receipt. A10 - 21.01.2009 - Building Tax Receipt. A11 - 23.01.2008 - Building Tax Receipt. A12 - 13.03.2007 - Building Tax Receipt. A13 - 22.02.2006 - Building Tax Receipt. A14 - 31.10.2002 - Building Tax Receipt. A15 - 29.11.2004 - Building Tax Receipt. A16 - 27.10.2001 - Building Tax Receipt. A17 - 25.09.2000 - Building Tax Receipt. A18 - 24.03.1998 - Building Tax Receipt. A19 - 10.03.1999 - Building Tax Receipt. A20 - 25.03.2015 - Building Tax Receipt. A21 - 10.07.2014 - True copy of Minutes Book. A22 - 10.11.2014 - True copy of Minutes Book.

Respondent's Witness:

       RW1 - 24.09.2019             - T.K.Naryan
       RW2 - 18.11.2019             - M.A.Balasubramanian


       Respondent's Exhibits:

R1 - 02.07.2007 - Copy of Certification of Registration (rejected). R2 - 21.07.2015 - Panchayath Licence. R3 - 12.02.1999 - Copy of Registration Certificate RCREV. NO. 94 OF 2024 5 (rejected).

R4 - 07.10.2015 - Copy of complaint submitted by T.K.Narayan to the Sub Inspector of Police, Sulthanbathery (rejected). R5 - 07.10.2015 - Petition receipt isssued by Sub Inspector of Police, Sulthanbathery. R6 - 30.09.2015 - Certified copy of the order in IA.1322/2015 in OS526/2015. R7 - - - Copy of the petition register. R8 - 06.12.2014 - Copy of the complaint. R9 - 06.12.2014 - Postal receipt. R10 - 08.12.2014 - Acknowledgement Card. R11 - 11.03.2013 - Notice issued by petitioner to the respondent.

R12 - - - Draft Rent Agreemewnt.

       R13 - 11.10.2015    - Copy of FIR.
       R14 - 30.06.2014    - Copy of Annual Return 2013-
                             2014 (rejected).
       R15 - 27.06.2015    - Copy of Annual Return 2014-
                            2015 (rejected).
       R16 - 05.08.2016    - Copy of Annual Return 2015-
                            2016 (rejected).
       R17 - 19.06.2017    - Copy of Annual Return 2016-
                             2017 (rejected).
       R18 - 30.05.2014    - Receipt of Professinal Tax.
       R19 - 22.02.2010    - Registration Certification issued
                             by Assistant Labour Office,
 RCREV. NO. 94 OF 2024
                           6


                           Sulthanbathery.

R20 - 22.09.2014 - Licence No.456 issued by Sulthanbathery Grama Panchayath. R21 - 16.01.2014 - Licence No.670 issued by Sulthanbatheri Grama Panchayath.

R22 - - - Copy of e-payment receipt of VAT for the month of April, 2013-2014 (rejeceted).

R22(a) - - Copy of e-payment receipt of VAT for the month of May, 2013- 2014 (rejected).

R22(b) - - Copy of e-payment receipt of VAT for the month of June, 2013-2014 (rejected).

R22(c) - - Copy of e-payment receipt of VAT for the month of July, 2013- 2014 (rejected).

R22(d) - - Copy of e-payment receipt of VAT for the month of August, 2013-2014 (rejected).

R22(e) - - Copy of e-payment receipt of VAT for the month of September, 2013- 2014 (rejected).

R22(f) - - Copy of e-payment receipt of VAT for the month of October, 2013-2014 (rejected).

RCREV. NO. 94 OF 2024 7 R22(g) - - Copy of e-payment receipt of VAT for the month of November, 2013-2014 (rejected).

R22(h) - - Copy of e-payment receipt of VAT for the month of December, 2013-2014 (rejected).

R22(i) - - Copy of e-payment receipt of VAT for the month of January, 2013-2014 (rejected).

R22(j) - - Copy of e-payment receipt of VAT for the month of February, 2013-2014 (rejected).

R22(k) - - Copy of e-payment receipt of VAT for the month of March, 2013-2014 (rejected)."

4. On analysis of evidences brought on record, learned Rent Controller ordered eviction. Appeal preferred against the aforementioned judgment has also been dismissed.

5. Mr.B.G.Harindranath, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Smt.P.Devi Krishna in support of grounds of revision stated that documents brought on record ex facie reveals that petitioner/tenant had not ceased to occupy business and had been running business from 10.a.m. to 5.p.m. Report of RCREV. NO. 94 OF 2024 8 Advocate Commissioner was based upon inspection conducted after closure of the shop and that could not be a ground for ordering the eviction on the ground of ceases to occupy. Sometimes tenants are not in possession of documents and adverse inference therefore in such circumstances cannot be drawn. Documents placed on record reveals that petitioner had been paying statutory bills, including electricity, in accordance with law.

6. Respondent/landlord claimed to be the trustee but no document have been placed on record in support of the same. Trial court has abdicated in not framing the issue in this regard but the plea can always be decided at any stage of the matter.

7. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and appraised the paper book.

8. Categoric case of respondent/landlord before Rent Controller, in petition filed in 2014 had been that petitioner/tenant ceased to occupy the petition schedule building from July, 2013. In order to belie the claim, tenant was required to place on record the document pertaining to said period, either two months before or three months after. However, RCREV. NO. 94 OF 2024 9 categoric finding of both Courts below had been that no documents regarding electricity bills and other statutory bills were placed on record. The premises in dispute is SBP VI/29. All the documents noticed above are of subsequent period. The ground of eviction ceased to occupy, thus, has been sufficed which has not been countered by any direct or cogent evidence by the petitioner/tenant. As far as objection with regard to the locus standi, we cannot go into merit, for, no issue was pressed or an evidence in material has been placed on record. We do not find any illegality and perversity.

No ground for interference is made out. Revision is dismissed accordingly.

Sd/-

AMIT RAWAL JUDGE Sd/-

EASWARAN S. JUDGE nak