Kerala High Court
Areefa Beevi vs Dr. Thomas Abraham on 1 July, 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.
st
Monday, the 1 day of July 2024 / 10th Ashadha, 1946
OP (RC) NO. 79 OF 2024
RCP 12/2021 OF MUNSIFF COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA.
PETITIONER(S)/ RESPONDENT:
AREEFA BEEVI, AGED 58 YEARS, W/O P.S ASHRAFF, AMEEN MANZIL,
VETTIPPURAM P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA VILLAGE, PROPRIETOR OF ALANKAR HYPER
MARKET, T.K ROAD, PATHANAMTHITTA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN -
689645
BY ADVS. M/S MANU RAMACHANDRAN, M.KIRANLAL, R.RAJESH (VARKALA),
T.S.SARATH, SAMEER M NAIR, SAILAKSHMI MENON & JOTHISHA K.A & SHIFANA M.
RESPONDENT/ PETITIONER:
DR. THOMAS ABRAHAM, AGED 71 YEARS, S/O T.G ABRAHAM, THELLERATHU
HOUSE, CHITTOOR MURI, PATHANAMTHITTA VILLAGE REPRESENTED BY HIS P.A
HOLDER, AJITH MATHEW GEORGE, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O DR. T. A GEORGE,
THELLERATHU HOUSE, CHITTOOR MURI, PATHANAMTHITTA VILLAGE,
PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689645
This OP (Rent Control) having come up for orders on 01-07-2024, upon
perusing the report dated 28-06-2024 of Munsiff, Pathanamthitta and this
court's order dated 27-06-2024, the court on the same day passed the
following:
(PTO)
AMIT RAWAL & EASWARAN S, JJ.
-------------------------------------------------------
OP(RC) No.79 of 2024
----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 1st day of July, 2024
ORDER
Amit Rawal, J.
On the last date of hearing we had passed the following
order:
1. This Court vide judgment dated 28.05.2024 disposed
of two R.C.Revisions, Nos.46 of 2024 and 60 of 2023
preferred by the tenant as well as the landlord.
2. The controversy between the landlord and tenant
was on the premise that jurisdiction of the Rent Controller
was invoked for fixation of the fair rent on the premise that
the tenant had been running a super market under the
name and style 'Alankar Hyper Market' and the rent fixed at
the time of tenancy was Rs.30,000/-. The aforementioned
super market consists of three storied building having an
area of 8690 sq.feet.
3. Petitioner - tenant opposed the aforementioned claim.
Rent Controller fixed the fair rent of the premises/building
at the rate of Rs.30/- per sq.feet for the ground floor i.e.,
4890 sq.ft and Rs.25/- per sq.feet for second floor
measuring 3800 sq.feet.
4. Tenant preferred an appeal. Appellate authority on
analysis of the documents brought on record fixed the fair
rent as Rs.12.81 per sq.feet of both the premises i.e., the
entire area measuring 8690 sq feet.
5. This court, noticing all these facts upheld the findings of
the appellate authority and granted the time to the tenant
to clear the arrears of rent determined by the appellate
authority within a period of two(2) months. The operative
part of the order reads as under:
"Tenant is directed to clear the arrears of rent
determined by the Appellate Authority within a
period of two months from the date of receipt of
copy of this judgment, failing which, the Landlord
would have a right to eviction seek in accordance
with law. We must add here that lease deed
entered into between the parties contained a
clause of increase to the extent of 15% after every
three years. Tenant shall adhere to the same."
6. Two months period would expire on 14.08.2024. The
factum of the aforementioned judgment was brought to the
notice of the Rent Controller vide I.A.No.4 of 2024 Ext.P4.
The contents of the application reads as under:
"2. The respondent in the above case had filed a
revision petition as RCRev. No.46/2024 before the
Hon'ble High Court of Kerala pertaining to the
petition scheduled shop building and the Hon'ble
High Court was pleased to grant the respondent
two months from the date of receipt of copy of the
judgment, for cleaning the arrears of rent. Hence
the consideration and trial of the present case may
be kept in abeyance for two months. The copy of
the order of the Hon'ble High Court is produced
herewith. An application filed accompanying this
affidavit for keeping the proceedings and trial of
the present case in abeyance and that may be
allowed in the interest of justice. Otherwise, the
respondent in the present case will be put to
irreparable injury, loss and hardships."
7. Mr.Manu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that despite having brought to the
notice of the Rent Controller the factum of the time granted,
Rent Controller allowed the RCP in finality by ordering
eviction on the ground of arrears of rent and dismissed the
application. The details of which have been taken to us,
which are taken on record. Registry is directed to paginate
and put at the end of the paper book.
8. Since the time granted by this Court has not expired,
in the prima facie view, Rent Controller could not have
ordered for eviction. Issue notice before admission to the
respondents. In the meantime, the eviction of the tenant is
ordered to be stayed.
9. In order to ascertain factual aspects we deem it
appropriate to call for the explanation of the concerned Rent
Controller. Let the explanation of the Presiding Officer /
Rent Controller who rendered the judgment along with the
copy of the judgment be called for by the Registrar (District
Judiciary).
10. The order is to be communicated to the Rent Controller
today itself. Report to be submitted by 29.06.2024.
Post on 01.07.2024.
2. Explanation has been received from the concerned
judge. Operative part of the same, reads as under:
It is humbly submitted that RCP.No.12/2021 was allowed
only conditionally, in tune with the Hon'ble High Court of
Kerala in R.C.Rev No. 46/2024. The order specifically states
that the order for eviction under section 11(2)(b) of the Act
is subject to the provisions of section 11(2)(c) of the Act.
The case was in included in the list of June, 2024. Hence,
the necessity to dispose the Rent Control Petition in June
itself. The respondent has not produced any order of stay to
halt the proceedings in RCP.No.12/2021.
I humbly submit that the order of the Hon'ble High Court of
Kerala was perused before the pronouncing of the order in
RCP.No.12/2021. The date of receipt of the copy of the order
by the respondent was not on record. The right of the
petitioner to seek eviction accrues only after the period of
two months granted by the order Hon'ble High Court, if the
arrears are not cleared off within the period. I may humbly
submit that I have strived carry out the effect of this order
in letter and spirit at the time of passing of the order in RCP.
No. 12/2021.
3. The explanation noticed above, in our considered
view is not plausible and justified. The learned Controller did
not adhere to the directions of this Court in a letter and spirit,
for, in any case the time period qua availability of certified copy
had not expired, Rent Controller could not have decided the
matter. It is a clear cut of violation of our order and also a
dereliction in duty. Before we take an appropriate direction,
we deem it appropriate to bring the aforementioned fact to the
notice of the portfolio judge and also to the Administrative
Committee of High Court for perusal and appropriate decision.
As per the office report, notice could not be issued as the
process fee had not been deposited. On furnishing the process
fee, let fresh notice be issued. Post on 31.7.2024. Interim
order will continue till then.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL, JUDGE
Sd/-
EASWARAN. S, JUDGE
sab
01-07-2024 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
