Abdulsalam vs Kunhathutty Umma
2023 Latest Caselaw 5672 Ker

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                   PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

                                      &

                THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

        TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF MAY 2023 / 26TH VAISAKHA, 1945

                            O.P.(RC)NO.94 OF 2023

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 03.04.2023 IN I.A.NO.6 OF 2023 IN RCP NO.40 OF

                   2016 PASSED BY THE RENT CONTORL COURT

                      (MUNSIFF COURT), PARAPPANANGADI

PETITIONER:

              ABDULSALAM,
              AGED 51 YEARS,
              S/O. CHEDAKKUTH MUHAMMED, CHEDAKKUTH HOUSE, PALLIKKAL
              P.O., PALLIKKAL AMSOM DESOM, KONDOTTY TALUK, MALAPPURAM
              DISTRICT, PIN - 673634

              BY ADVS.
              K.P.SUDHEER
              J.RAMKUMAR



RESPONDENT:

              KUNHATHUTTY UMMA,
              AGED 72 YEARS,
              D/O. MANNINGACHALI KOMU HAJI, W/O. AHAMMED, THURAKKAL
              P.O., KONDOTTY AMSOM, KOLATHUR DESOM, KONDOTTY TALUK,
              MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 673638


OTHER PRESENT:

              SRI JAMSHEED HAFIZ- RESPONDENT

      THIS OP (RENT CONTROL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.05.2023,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                      2

O.P.(RC)No.94 of 2023



                               JUDGMENT

Kauser Edappagath, J.

Ext.P12 order dismissing Ext.P8 application to remit

Advocate Commissioner's report in a Rent Control Petition is

under challenge in this original petition.

2. The petitioner is the tenant and the respondent is the

landlord. The respondent-landlord filed a petition for eviction

under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent

Control) Act, 1965. The need alleged is that he wants to conduct

a supermarket in the petition schedule building after making

necessary modification and alteration to it to suit the business.

The tenant filed objection statement interalia contending that the

building is an old one and it cannot be modified or altered in any

manner as stated by the landlord.

3. At the instance of the tenant, a Commission has been

taken out to report about the nature and condition of the building.

Ext.P5 is the report filed by the Commissioner. In the said report,

there is an observation by the Commissioner that to assess the

stability of the building, the assistance of an expert is necessary.

Thereafter, the tenant filed Ext.P8 application to remit the

commissioner report to inspect the building once again with the

assistance of a PWD Engineer. The Rent Control Court dismissed

O.P.(RC)No.94 of 2023

that application as per Ext.P12, which is under challenge in this

original petition.

4. We have heard both sides.

5. As stated already, the need projected is to conduct the

supermarket business in the petition schedule building after

making necessary modification and alteration. The landlord has

every right to make necessary modification and alteration so as

to suit the building for the proposed business. The tenant cannot

decide in what manner and fashion the building should be put to

use by the landlord. There is already a commission report which

gives details about the nature, condition and stability of the

building. Further inspection with the assistance of a PWD

Engineer as sought for in Ext.P8 is not at all necessary to decide

the dispute involved in the Rent Control Petition. We find no

illegality in the impugned order.

Accordingly, O.P.(RC) is dismissed. The Rent Control Court

shall dispose of the Rent Control Petition untramalled by any of

the observations made in this judgment. Sd/-

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE MIN

O.P.(RC)No.94 of 2023

APPENDIX OF OP (RC) 94/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P 1 TRUE COPY OF RENT CONTROL PETITION DATED 9.8.2016 IN R.C.P. NO. 40/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE RENT CONTROL COURT (MUNSIFF), PARAPPANANGADI FILED BY THE RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P 2 TRUE COPY OF JUDGEMENT/ORDER DATED 22/06/2022 IN RENT CONTROL REVISION NO. 37 OF 2022 AND OP (RC) NO. 40 OF 2022 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT.

EXHIBIT P 3 TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS DATED 24/08/2022 IN RCP NO. 40/2016 DOWNLOADED FROM THE WEBSITE OF THE COURT BELOW (MUNSIFF COURT, PARAPPANANGADI)

EXHIBIT P 4 TRUE COPY OF COUNTER STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN RCP NO. 40 OF 2016 ON THE FILE OF THE RENT CONTROL COURT (MUNSIFF), PARAPPANANGADI.

EXHIBIT P 5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 12/01/2023 AND THE ROUGH SKETCH ATTACHED TO THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER IN I.A. NO. 4/2022 IN RCP NO. 40/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE RENT CONTROL COURT (MUNSIFF), PARAPPANANGADI.

EXHIBIT P 6 TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS DATED 12.1.2023 OF THE RENT CONTROL COURT (MUNSIFF), PARAPPANANGADI IN RCP NO. 40/2016 DOWNLOADED FROM THE WEBSITE OF THE COURT BELOW.

EXHIBIT P 7 TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE RENT CONTROL COURT (MUNSIFF), PARAPPANANGADI DATED 25.3.2023 IN RCP NO. 40/2016 DOWNLOADED FROM THE WEBSITE.

O.P.(RC)No.94 of 2023

EXHIBIT P 8 TRUE COPY OF PETITION DATED 24.3.2023

OF 2023 IN RCP NO. 40 OF 2016 ON THE FILE OF THE RENT CONTROL COURT (MUNSIFF), PARAPPANANGADI.

EXHIBIT P 9 TRUE COPY OF COUNTER DATED 31/03/2023 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT IN EXHIBIT P8 APPLICATION (I.A. NO. 6/2023 IN RCP NO. 40/2016).

EXHIBIT P 10 TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS DATED 31/03/2023 OF THE RENT CONTROL COURT (MUNSIFF COURT), PARAPPANANGADI IN RCP NO. 40 OF 2016.

EXHIBIT P 11 TRUE COPY OF JUDGEMENT DATED 23/03/2023 IN OP (RC) NO. 53 OF 2023 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.

EXHIBIT P 12 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 03/04/2023 IN I.A. NO. 6 OF 2023 IN RCP NO. 40 OF 2016 PASSED BY RENT CONTROL COURT (MUNSIFF COURT), PARAPPANANGADI.

EXHIBIT P 13 TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS DATED 03/04/2023 IN RCP NO. 40 OF 2016 DOWNLOADED FROM THE WEBSITE OF THE COURT BELOW (RENT CONTROL COURT (MUNSIFF), PARAPPANANGADI