Kerala High Court
Lalitha vs M/S Lakshmi Lodge on 8 November, 2024
Author: Amit Rawal
Bench: Amit Rawal
2024:KER:84207
RC.REV.NOs.186 OF 2024 & con. Cases
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 17TH KARTHIKA, 1946
RCREV. NO. 186 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 10.06.2024 IN RCA NO.46
OF 2024 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT -IV,
THRISSUR/III ADDITIONAL MACT, THRISSUR ARISING OUT OF THE
ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 31.01.2024 IN RCP NO.43 OF 2011 OF MUNSIFF
COURT,CHAVAKKAD
REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:
HEERALAL
AGED 66 YEARS
S/O VALIYAKKAL BALARAMAN, THAIKKAD AMSOM, DESOM,
CHAVAKKAD TALUK THRISSUR, PIN - 680506
BY ADVS.
M.P.ASHOK KUMAR
BINDU SREEDHAR
ASIF N
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:
M/S LAKSHMI LODGE
GURUVAYUR AMSOM, DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK.
REP. BY MANAGING PARTNER - DHANDAPAANI,
AGED 82, S/O GOVINDA CHETTIYAR, GURUVAYUR AMSOM,
CHAVAKKAD TALUK THRISSUR -, PIN - 680506
THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.11.2024, ALONG WITH RCRev..187/2024, 188/2024 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:84207
RC.REV.NOs.186 OF 2024 & con. Cases
2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 17TH KARTHIKA, 1946
RCREV. NO. 187 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 10.06.2024 IN RCA NO.44
OF 2024 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT -IV,
THRISSUR/III ADDITIONAL MACT, THRISSUR ARISING OUT OF THE
ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 31.01.2024 IN RCP NO.41 OF 2011 OF MUNSIFF
COURT,CHAVAKKAD
REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:
NALAKATH PADUVINGAL MUHAMMEDMON
AGED 70 YEARS
S/O BAVU, PADOOR DESOM, VENKITANGU AMSOM,
CHAVAKKAD TALUK, (FRIENDS FOOTWARE, KIZHAKKE NADA,
GURUVAYUR) THRISSUR, PIN - 680506
BY ADVS.
M.P.ASHOK KUMAR
BINDU SREEDHAR
ASIF N
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:
M/S LAKSHMI LODGE
GURUVAYUR AMSOM, DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK.
REP. BY MANAGING PARTNER - DHANDAPAANI,
AGED 82, S/O GOVINDA CHETTIYAR, GURUVAYUR AMSOM,
CHAVAKKAD TALUK THRISSUR , PIN - 680506
THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.11.2024, ALONG WITH RCRev..186/2024 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:84207
RC.REV.NOs.186 OF 2024 & con. Cases
3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 17TH KARTHIKA, 1946
RCREV. NO. 188 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 10.06.2024 IN RCA
NO.48 OF 2024 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT
-IV, THRISSUR/III ADDITIONAL MACT, THRISSUR ARISING OUT OF
THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 31.01.2024 IN RCP NO.45 OF 2011 OF
MUNSIFF COURT,CHAVAKKAD
REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANTS/RESPONDENT:
1 YASODHA
AGED 69 YEARS
W/O VAZHAPPILATH VEETTIL RADHAKRISHNAN,
NENMINI DESOM, GURUVAYUR AMSOM,
CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR, PIN - 680506
2 SUREKHA
AGED 50 YEARS
W/O SATHYAN, & D/O VAZHAPPILATH VEETTIL
RADHAKRISHNAN, NENMINI DESOM, GURUVAYUR AMSOM,
CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR, PIN - 680506
3 REKAHA
AGED 48 YEARS
W/O JAYESH, & D/O VAZHAPPILATH VEETTIL
RADHAKRISHNAN, NENMINI DESOM, GURUVAYUR AMSOM,
CHAVAKKAD TALUK THRISSUR, PIN - 680506
BY ADVS.
M.P.ASHOK KUMAR
BINDU SREEDHAR
ASIF N
2024:KER:84207
RC.REV.NOs.186 OF 2024 & con. Cases
4
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:
M/S LAKSHMI LODGE
GURUVAYUR AMSOM, DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK.
REP. BY MANAGING PARTNER - DHANDAPAANI,
AGED 82, S/O GOVINDA CHETTIYAR, GURUVAYUR AMSOM,
CHAVAKKAD TALUK THRISSUR, PIN - 680506
THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 08.11.2024, ALONG WITH RCRev..186/2024 AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:84207
RC.REV.NOs.186 OF 2024 & con. Cases
5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 17TH KARTHIKA, 1946
RCREV. NO. 189 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 10.06.2024 IN RCA NO.47
OF 2024 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT-IV,
THRISSUR/III ADDITIONAL MACT, THRISSUR ARISING OUT OF THE
ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 31.01.2024 IN RCP NO.44 OF 2011 OF MUNSIFF
COURT, CHAVAKKAD
REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:
LALITHA
AGED 51 YEARS, W/O KALATHUPURATH LATE SUNILKUMAR,
THAIKKAD DESOM, GURUVAYUR AMSOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK
THRISSUR, PIN - 680506
BY ADVS.
M.P.ASHOK KUMAR
BINDU SREEDHAR
ASIF N
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:
M/S LAKSHMI LODGE
GURUVAYUR AMSOM, DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK.
REP. BY MANAGING PARTNER - DHANDAPAANI,
AGED 82, S/O GOVINDA CHETTIYAR, GURUVAYUR AMSOM,
CHAVAKKAD TALUK THRISSUR, PIN - 680506
THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.11.2024, ALONG WITH RCRev..186/2024 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:84207
RC.REV.NOs.186 OF 2024 & con. Cases
6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 17TH KARTHIKA, 1946
RCREV. NO. 192 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 10.06.2024 IN RCA NO.45 OF
2024 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT-IV, THRISSUR/III
ADDITIONAL MACT, THRISSUR ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED
31.01.2024 IN RCP NO.42 OF 2011 OF MUNSIFF COURT, CHAVAKKAD
REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:
PUSHPA SANKARAN
AGED 70 YEARS
W/O KALEEDAKATH SANKARAN, PUTHENPALLI DESOM, GURUVAYUR
AMSOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK.
THRISSUR, PIN - 680506
BY ADVS.
M.P.ASHOK KUMAR
BINDU SREEDHAR
ASIF N
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:
M/S LAKSHMI LODGE
GURUVAYUR AMSOM, DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK.
REP. BY MANAGING PARTNER - DHANDAPAANI,
AGED 82, S/O GOVINDA CHETTIYAR, GURUVAYUR AMSOM,
CHAVAKKAD TALUK THRISSUR, PIN - 680506
BY ADVS.
ANIL KUMAR M
PREETHI K.PURUSHOTHAMAN(K/000485/1998)
THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.11.2024, ALONG WITH RCRev..186/2024 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:84207
RC.REV.NOs.186 OF 2024 & con. Cases
7
ORDER
[RCRev. Nos.186/2024, 187/2024, 188/2024, 189/2024, 192/2024]
Amit Rawal, J.
1. This order shall dispose of five(5) rent
revision petitions preferred by the petitioners - tenants
occupying the tenanted premises in different rent petitions
filed by the landlord claiming the ejectment on the ground
under Section 11(2)(b) arrears of rent, 11(3) personal
necessity and 11(8) of Kerala Building (Lease and Rent
Control) Act, 1965. On receipt of the notices of the rent
petitions all the tenants had put in appearance and when
service was completed landlord submitted an application by
invoking the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 12 of
1965 Act which provides a provision to the landlord to claim
the admitted arrears of rent through the intervention of Rent
Controller.
2. Landlord, in the rent petition claimed the
arrears of rent at the rate of Rs.1,500/- (Rupees one
2024:KER:84207
RC.REV.NOs.186 OF 2024 & con. Cases
thousand five hundred only), but in the application submitted
under sub-section (1) of Section 12, claimed rent at the rate
of Rs.3,750/- (Rupees three thousand seven hundred fifty
only) and arrears with effect from 09.04.2012. The
aforementioned claim was based upon the decision dated
09.04.2012 rendered in Rent Control Petition bearing
No.56/2012 claiming fixation of fair rent. It is pertinent to
mention here all the rent petitions were filed prior to the
aforementioned rent petition. Learned Rent Controller, on
examination of the contention and rival contentions, vide
order dated 22.12.2023 fixed the admitted arrears of rent
with effect from 09.04.2012 at the rate of Rs.3,750/- (Rupees
three thousand seven hundred fifty only) to be paid within
four(4) weeks and further directed to pay continuously the
rent for the subsequent period within fifteen(15) days of the
rent falling due.
3. Petitioners - tenants did not deposit the
amount within four(4) weeks and challenged the same before
the Appellate Authority and tried to justify in not making the
2024:KER:84207
RC.REV.NOs.186 OF 2024 & con. Cases
payment on the ground that landlord in the absence of any
amendment in the rent petition, had only confined the claim
qua admitted arrears of rent at the rate of Rs.1,500/-
(Rupees one thousand five hundred only) whereas the
contention of the petitioners -tenants qua the rate of rent
was Rs.150/- (Rupees one hundred fifty only). Appeals have
also been rejected. It is in that background, all these
revisions petitions are before us.
4. Sri.M.P.Ashok kumar, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the
orders under challenge are not sustainable in the eyes of law
on account of following points:
(i) Landlord cannot claim different arrears/admitted
rate of rent than the one claimed in the rent
petition. In other words, the claim was changed
to Rs.1,500/- (Rupees one thousand five
hundred only) whereas the tenant had admitted
the arrears of rent at the rate of Rs.150/-
(Rupees one hundred fifty only).
2024:KER:84207
RC.REV.NOs.186 OF 2024 & con. Cases
(ii) There are two limbs provided under
Section 12(1) for fixation of admitted rate of
rent whereas the tenant had never admitted the
amount of Rs.1,500/- (Rupees one thousand five
hundred only) or Rs.3,750/- (Rupees three
thousand seven hundred fifty only). In support
of the contention relied upon the judgment of
Division Bench in Sadique v. Mohammed
Umair [2017 (3) KLT 759].
(iii) It was further contended that after
the expiry of the time granted in the order fixing
the arrears of rent on failure of the tenant to pay
the rent, duty is cast upon Rent Controller to
issue a notice to the tenants to pay the arrears
of rent and in support of the aforementioned
contention, relied upon the ratio decidendi culled
out in paragraph No.29 in the judgment in
Sivadasan v. Nirmala [2022 (3) KLT 313].
Therefore, the orders are not sustainable, liable
2024:KER:84207
RC.REV.NOs.186 OF 2024 & con. Cases
to be set aside.
5. Sri.M.Anilkumar, learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the caveator submitted that tenants have not
been successful in defending the order dated 09.04.2012
passed in R.C.P.No.56/2012 whereby the rent at the rate of
Rs.3,750/- (Rupees three thousand seven hundred fifty only)
has been fixed and in view of the case law noticed by the
Rent Conroller ie., Williams Daniel v. Jose [2019 (5) KHC
205] it has been held that the expression arrears of rent
determined under Section 12 and attained finality in other
connected petitions where the rent has either in a petition
preferred under Section 11(2)(b) or under other provisions
like Section 5, would be binding on the tenant.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the
parties and appraised the paper books.
7. Section 12 of the Kerala Building (Lease and
Rent Control) Act reads as under:
"12. Payment or deposit oj 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
2024:KER:84207
RC.REV.NOs.186 OF 2024 & con. Cases
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.
(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 subsection (4):
Provided that 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.
(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 building.
(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
2024:KER:84207
RC.REV.NOs.186 OF 2024 & con. Cases
deposited may, subject to such conditions as may be
prescribed, be withdrawn by the landlord on application
made by him to the Rent Control Court or the appellate
authority in that behalf."
8. On perusal of the provisions of sub-section
(1) and sub-section (3) which have been brought into force
and are relevant for adjudication of lis, there is no quarrel to
the fact that tenants are required to pay the admitted rate of
rent. The question which is posed before us whether in a
parallel proceedings initiated after the institution of the
present rent petitions, tenants had already suffered an order
dated 09.04.2012 whereby admitted rate of rent has been
fixed as Rs.3,750/- (Rupees three thousand seven hundred
fifty only) with effect from 09.04.2012 can be construed to be
admitted arrears of rent or not, relying the judgment in
Williams Daniel v. Jose [2019 (5) KHC 205]. The
aforementioned judgment would be fully applicable in the
present case for the reason that the appeal preferred against
the order dated 09.04.2012 fixing the fair rent at the rate of
Rs.3,750/- (Rupees three thousand seven hundred fifty only)
2024:KER:84207
RC.REV.NOs.186 OF 2024 & con. Cases
has been dismissed and there is no further challenge. In view
of the answer to the question raised and posed, we are of the
view that there was need for the landlord to seek the
amendment of rent petitions and therefore, the argument of
Sri.M.P.Ashok Kumar on this point is hereby rejected.
9. Coming to the other point with regard to the
issuance of notice, the language of Section 12
aforementioned in our considered view do not require a
different interpretation for us to rely upon the ratio decidendi
culled out in the judgment in Sivadasan (supra) for the
reason that the order passed under Section 12(1) dated
22.12.2023 clearly prescribed a time line for payment of
arrears of rent. However, had the order assessing the
admitted arrears of rent did not provide a time line, in those
circumstances, there is no quarrel that a notice is required to
be issued to the tenants to pay the arrears. Therefore, there
is no force in the argument and is also rejected.
10. The offer now made during the course of the
argument to clear the arrears cannot be accepted as already
2024:KER:84207
RC.REV.NOs.186 OF 2024 & con. Cases
valuable right has accrued in view of the fact that Rent
Controller noticing that the petitioners - tenants have not
complied with the order passed under sub-section (3) of
Section 12 on 31.01.2024, in favour of the landlord -caveator
11. As an upshot of our finding, we do not find
any illegality and perversity in the orders under challenge.
Revision Petitions sans merit, accordingly, dismissed.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL
JUDGE
Sd/-
EASWARAN S.
JUDGE
nak
