C.A.Vijayan vs Simon
2025 Latest Caselaw 4942 Ker

Kerala High Court

C.A.Vijayan vs Simon on 10 March, 2025

Author: A. Muhamed Mustaque

Bench: A.Muhamed Mustaque

                                                        2025:KER:20107

R.C.Rev. No.18 of 2025
                                       1

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                    PRESENT

            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

                                       &

                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. KRISHNA KUMAR

  MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 19TH PHALGUNA, 1946

                           RCREV. NO. 18 OF 2025

           AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17.10.2022 IN RCA NO.125 OF

2017       OF    III   ADDITIONAL   DISTRICT   COURT,   THRISSUR   /   II

ADDITIONAL MACT, THRISSUR ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER DATED

29.07.2017 IN RCP NO.88 OF 2014 OF MUNSIFF COURT,CHAVAKKAD

REVISION PETITIONER/2ND APPELLANT/2ND RESPONDENT:

                 C.A.VIJAYAN, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O APPU,
                 CHERUPARAMBIL HOUSE, KAVANAM, CHITTOR DESHOM,
                 CHOWANNUR VILLAGE, THALAPIILY TAHLUK THRISSUR
                 DISTRICT., PIN - 680 517


                 BY ADV SREERAJ M.D.


RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENT & 1ST APPELLANT/PETITIONER & 1ST
RESPONDENT:

       1         SIMON, AGED 72 YEARS, S/O IMMATTY CHAKKORU,
                 KIZHUR DESOM, KUNNAMKULAM VILLAGE, THALAPPILLY
                 TALUK THALAPPILLY TALUK. THIRISSUR, PIN - 680 503

       2         C.R.RAJESH, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O CHERUPARAMBIL
                 RAGHAVAN, KAVANAM CHITTOOR DESOM, CHOWANNUR
                 VILLAGE, THALAPPILLY TALUK. THRISSUR, PIN - 680
                 517
                                                      2025:KER:20107

R.C.Rev. No.18 of 2025
                                   2

             BY ADVS.
             Sumodh Madhavan Nair
             J.RAMKUMAR(K/376/2013)



      THIS    RENT   CONTROL     REVISION   HAVING   COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION     ON   10.03.2025,    THE   COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                                          2025:KER:20107

R.C.Rev. No.18 of 2025
                                    3




                            ORDER

A. Muhamed Mustaque, J.

This revision petition is preferred by the sub tenant

challenging an order of eviction. The Rent Control Court and the

Rent Control Appellate Authority found that the landlord made

out a case under Section 11(4)(i) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease

and Rent Control) Act, 1965, on the ground of sub lease. The

Rent Control Appellate Authority passed the order on

17.10.2022. Thereafter, after a long delay, this revision petition

was preferred on 23.01.2025. We issued notice to the

respondents. Adv. Sumodh Madhavan Nair entered appearance

for the respondents at the stage of admission.

2. The application for eviction was a composite

application and a relief of fair rent fixation was also sought. We

shall advert to the grounds of eviction.

3. The revision petitioner is the sub tenant. The

second respondent is the tenant. The case of the landlord is

that the tenant sub leased the building to the revision petitioner.

4. In this matter, the landlord took out a

commission. The commissioner reported the presence of the 2025:KER:20107

revision petitioner in the shop room, where he is carrying out

the business. It is noted that the revision petitioner was running

a business. Absolutely, no documents were produced to show

that the business is being run by the tenant.

5. On the other hand, evidence adduced by the

landlord would show the presence of the revision petitioner, who

is a stranger to the tenancy. In the absence of any explanation

put forward by the tenant in regard to the presence of stranger,

landlord's claim for eviction will have to be accepted. The

concurrent findings clearly establish the case that the tenant sub

leased the building. Further, no challenge is raised by the

tenant. The revision petitioner has no case that it was

permissible sub lease. Therefore, the revision petitioner has no

authority to question the order of eviction. We need not

interfere into such finding of facts invoking our revisional power.

6. In regard to the question of fair rent fixation,

the initial rent was fixed at Rs.1000/- per month. Thereafter, it

was enhanced to Rs.1400/- per month in the year 2008. The

building appears to be located in an important place in

Kunnamkulam. Taking note of the location and commercial

importance, the Rent Control Court fixed the rent at the rate of 2025:KER:20107

Rs.3000/- per month with ten per cent increase on every year.

While concluding the rate, the Rent Control Court also noted the

rent payable to similar buildings in the locality. Absolutely,

there is no scope for interfering with such findings. We do not

find any reason to interfere with the matter. However, taking

note of the fervent plea made by the learned counsel for the

revision petitioner, we grant six months time from today to

vacate the building on the following terms and conditions:

(i) An undertaking shall be filed before the Rent

Control Court, within four weeks from today, that the petitioner-

tenant will vacate the building within the time granted.

(ii) The entire arrears, if any, shall be cleared

within four weeks and continue to pay the monthly rent up-to-

date till the actual surrender of the building.

This R.C. Rev. is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE

Sd/-

P. KRISHNA KUMAR JUDGE PR 2025:KER:20107

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 17/10/2022 IN R.C.A 125/2017 OF THE RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THRISSUR

Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 29/07/2017 IN R.C.P NO.88/2014 OF THE RENT CONTROL COURT, CHAVAKKAD