Kerala High Court
Umadevi vs Anwar on 4 June, 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.
TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 14TH JYAISHTA, 1946
RCREV. NO. 79 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20.01.2024 IN RCA NO.121 OF 2023 OF
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT KOZHIKODE- II ARISING OUT OF THE
JUDGMENT DATED 26.07.2023 IN RCP NO.65 OF 2021 OF MUNSIFF COURT,
VADAKARA
REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:
UMADEVI
AGED 58 YEARS
BUSINES, RESIDING AT EERAYEENTAVIDA, MUTTUNGAL (P.O),
MUTTUNGAL AMSOM AND DESOM, VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE
DISTRICT., PIN - 673106
BY ADVS.
U.K.DEVIDAS
K.K.ANILRAJ
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:
ANWAR
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O. UMRACHI CHERIYA HASSA HAJI, SWASTHAM, RESIDING AT
SEENATH MANZIL, MUTTUNGAL(P.O.) MUTTUNGAL AMSOM DESOM,
VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DIDTRICT, PIN - 673106
BY ADVS.
B.KRISHNAN
R.PARTHASARATHY(K/151/1996)
THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON
04.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
RCREV. NO. 79 OF 2024
2
JUDGMENT
Amit Rawal, J.
Present revision petition is at the instance of the petitioner-
tenant, who has been evicted on account of non deposit of the
arrears of the rent determined under Section 12(1) and
consequential order under Section 12(3) of the Kerala Buildings
(Lease and Rent Control) Act 2 of 1965.
2. The facts leading to the filing of the present petition in brief
are that the respondent-landlord sought the eviction of the
petitioner-tenant on various grounds including the arrears of rent.
The arrears of rent were determined by the Rent Controller vide
order dated 3.10.2022 in terms of the provisions provided under
sub Section 1 of Section 12 of the Act. The order reads thus:
This is the order in the above petition filed under Section
12(3) of The Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act,
1965 (hereinafter referred as "The Act'). The petitioner and
the respondent herein are the petitioner and the respondent
respectively in the above R.C.P.
2. The petition averments, in brief, are as follows: The
petition schedule shop room was rented out by the petitioner
to the respondent for a monthly rent of Rs.6000/-. The
respondent has willfully kept the rent in arrears from 2021
April to 2022 June which amounts to Rs.90,000/- She is also
liable to pay interest on the same. Hence the respondent may
be directed to pay the rent arrears along with interest to the
petition
3. On receipt of notice, the respondent filed counter in which
she had admitted the rent ears from November 2021 and she
sought some time for payment.
RCREV. NO. 79 OF 2024
4. Heard both sides.
5. In a petition filed under Section 12 (3) of the Act, a roving
enquiry is not warranted and also it is not permissible. In the
petition at hand, the respondent is not disputing the month,
rent of Rs.6000/- as claimed by the petitioner. Further the
respondent is admitting the rent arrears from November
2021. Hence I am of the pinion that the admitted rent arrears
can be granted and it is ordered so.
In the result, the petition is allowed as follows:-
(1) The respondent is directed to deposit 48000 /-
(Rupees Forty eight Thousand only), which is the admitted
arrears of rent from November 2021 to June 2022 @
Rs.6000/- per month, before this Court within four weeks
from today. The respondent shall also continue to pay or
deposit the rent accrues thereafter.
(ii) Both parties shall bear their respective costs.
3. On perusal of the order, the tenant was ordered to pay the
arrears @ Rs.6000/- and continue to pay further. The tenant
cleared the arrears up to 1st November 2021 and thereafter there
was a fault. The cause of action accrued in favour of the
respondent-landlord to seek eviction. However, the learned Rent
Controller without asking for the sufficient cause, granted another
30 days to the petitioner-tenant to clear the arrears. The next date
was 29.5.2023. The thirty (30) days expired on 28.6.2023. Tenant
did not deposit the same and the matter was listed on 26.7.2023.
On 26th July also, the time was sought and ultimately, the amount of
arrears from October 2022 to 31.8.2023 @ 6000/- was deposited as
per challan dated 6.9.2023 which was attached along with the
appeal.
RCREV. NO. 79 OF 2024
4. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner-tenant
has been able to show the reasonable cause as on 26.7.2023,
request was sought for granting extension which was refused on
the ground that the right had accrued in favor of the respondent-
landlord to seek the eviction. In support of the contentions relied
upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Ramkumar J. v.
Ashok Jacob (2022 (1) KHC 495).
5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the respondent-landlord submitted that the expression reasonable
cause as noticed in the judgment was not accompanied by any
documentary evidence to establish the bonafide in not paying the
arrears of rent as per the previous order dated 3.10.2022.
Provisions of the Section 12(1) and 12(3) are sacrosant and cannot
be interpreted to the suitability of the tenant. There has to be
eviction order in case the tenant defaults. The default cannot be
condoned by attaching the chalan on subsequent date that too at
appellate stage. Though the Rent Controller ought to have ordered
the eviction on 29.5.2023, but granted another thirty (30) days
which was also not availed of. In support of the contentions relied
upon Subeesh v. Vichathran (2023 KHC 9223).
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and
appraised the paper book. On perusal of the order dated
RCREV. NO. 79 OF 2024
3.10.2022, it is evident that the tenant was directed to clear the
arrears of rent @ Rs.6000/- and continue to pay further.
Concededly, the petitioner-tenant did not pay the arrears. On
29.5.2023, the following order was passed.
Both sides represented. Respondent is directed to deposit
admitted arrears within 30 days of this order. Take steps
29.6.2023.
7. Tenant did not honour the order dated 29.5.2023. As per the
proceedings, the matter was adjourned to 29.6.2023. On
29.6.2023, there was no sitting. Petitioner, on his own sought the
extension of time on 26.7.2023; there was no such posting on that
date. For the reason that, the default had occurred on 29.6.2023.
Section 12(1) and 12(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent
Control) Act 2 of 1965 reads as under:
12. Payment or deposit of rent during the pendency of
proceedings for eviction. No tenant against whom an application
for eviction has been made by a landlord under section 11, shall
be entitled to contest the application before the Rent Control
Court under that section, or to prefer an appeal under section
18 against any order made by the Rent Control Court on the
application, unless he has paid or pays to the landlord, or
deposits with the Rent Control Court or the appellate authority,
as the case may be, all arrears of rent admitted by the tenant to
be due in respect of the building up to the date of payment or
deposit, and continues to pay or to deposit any rent which may
subsequently become due in respect of the' building, until the
termination of the proceedings before the Rent Control Court or
the appellate authority, as the case may be.
(3) If any tenant fails to pay or to deposit the rent as aforesaid,
the Rent Control Court or the appellate authority, as the case
may be, shall, unless the tenant shows sufficient cause to the
contrary, stop all further proceedings and make an order
directing the tenant to put the landlord in possession of the
RCREV. NO. 79 OF 2024
building.
8. In the judgment cited by the petitioner Ramkumar J. (supra),
no doubt, in paragraph 12, it is held that if the tenant fails to pay or
to deposit the rent by expressing reasonable cause that can always
taken into consideration but not otherwise. Para 12 of the
judgment reads thus:
12. Section 12 of the Act deals with payment or deposit of rent
during the pendency of proceedings for eviction. As per Section
12(1), no tenant against whom an application for eviction has
been made by a landlord under Section 11, shall be entitled to
contest the application before the Rent Control Court under
that Section, or to prefer an appeal under Section 18 against
any order made by the Rent Control Court on the application,
unless he has paid or pays to the landlord, or deposits with the
Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority, as the case may
be, all arrears of rent admitted by the tenant to be due in
respect of the building up to the date of payment or deposit, and
continues to pay or to deposit any rent which may subsequently
become due in respect of the building, until the termination of
the proceedings before the Rent Control Court or the Appellate
Authority, as the case may be. As per Section 12(2), the deposit
under sub-section (1) shall be made within such time as the
court may fix and in such manner as may be prescribed and
shall be accompanied by the fee prescribed for the service of
notice referred to in sub-section (4). As per the proviso to
Section 12(2), the time fixed by the court for the deposit of the
arrears of rent shall not be less than four weeks from the date
of the order and the time fixed for the deposit of rent which
subsequently accrues due shall not be less than two weeks from
the date on which the rent becomes due. As per Section 12(3) of
the Act, if any tenant fails to pay or to deposit the rent as
aforesaid, the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority, as
the case may be, shall, unless the tenant shows sufficient cause
to the contrary, stop all further proceedings and make an order
directing the tenant to put the landlord in possession of the
building. As per Section 12(4), when any deposit is made under
sub-section (1), the Rent Control Court or the Appellate
Authority, as the case may be, shall cause notice of the deposit
to be served on the landlord in the prescribed manner, and the
amount deposited may, subject to such conditions as may be
prescribed, be withdrawn by the landlord on application made
RCREV. NO. 79 OF 2024
by him to the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority in
that behalf.
However, in the instant case, reasonable cause, though urged
and pleaded was not supported by any evidence, thus cannot be
said to be falling within the terms of the provisions of the Act
extracted above. Consequential order of eviction has to be passed
in terms of the judgment in Subeesh (supra). We do not find any
illegality or perversity in the impugned order. Revision petition is
dismissed.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL
JUDGE
Sd/-
sab EASWARAN S.
JUDGE
