Authority under the impugned judgment referred to various decisions including particularly to the judgment of this court in Charulatha Vs. Manju (2004 (1) KLT 290) and the judgment in Aboobacker Vs.Girija (1995 (1) KLT 553). The Appellate Authority has ruled that in the present case where the revision petitioner does not admit that his jural status in the building is that of a tenant is not entitled to have the bonafides of the denial of the title raised by him under the proviso to Section 11 (1) enquired into by the Rent Control Court. In that view of the matter the Appellate Authority set aside the order of the Rent Control Court and has remitted the RCP back to the Rent Control Court for enquiring into the merits of the eviction ground. Having gone through the grounds raised and having considered the submissions addressed at the bar, we are of the view that the judgment of the Full Bench of this court in Parthakumar Vs. Ajith Viswanathan (2006 (2) KLT 250 (F.B.)) decides the issue in favour of the revision petitioner. Under that judgment, the Full Bench, after overruling the judgment of the Division Bench in Charulatha Vs. Manju (cited supra), has ruled that in order that the Rent Control Court examines the bonafide of denial of title under the proviso to Section 11(1), it is enough that the alleged tenant is proceeded against by the landlord as a tenant. Thus the ruling of the Full Bench is to the
