Dismissed

K.Balaraman v. Cheriya Patha @ Fathima

Kerala HC4 Apr 2013RCRev./353/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a revision, the Kerala High Court upheld orders requiring a landlord tenant to pay admitted arrears of rent despite a roof collapse. The Court held that continued possession precludes refusal to pay under Section 12 of the Act and dismissed the revision petition.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition dismissed; petitioner confirmed to pay admitted rent arrears within one month if desirous.

K.Balaraman Vs Cheriya Patha @ Fathima — Landlord and Tenant | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2013/14TH CHAITHRA 1935

¶5

RCRev..No. 353 of 2012 ()

¶6

-------------------------------- ----

¶7

RCA.41/2012 of IIND ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, (RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY-II) KOZHIKODE.

¶8

RCP.63/2010 of PRL.MUNSIFF COURT, (RENT CONTROL COURT),KOZHIKODE-II.

¶9

REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:

¶10

K.BALARAMAN, AGED 62 YEARS S/O.KOLADY VASU, RESIDING AT KOLADY HOUSE KACHERI AMSOM, DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADVS.SRI.R.SUDHISH SMT.M.MANJU SRI.K.R.RANJITH

¶12

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS:

¶13

1. CHERIYA PATHA @ FATHIMA, AGED 63 YEARS W/O.LATE P.P.KUNHAMU, PULIYULLAPARAMBIL NELLIKODE VILLAGE, KOVOOR DESOM, KOZHIKODE-673017.

¶14

2. KHALID, AGED 42 YEARS S/O.CHERIYA PATHA, PULIYULLAPARAMBIL NELLIKODE VILLAGE, KOVOOR DESOM, KOZHIKODE-673017.

¶15

R1,R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.M.FIROZ R1,R2 BY ADV. SMT.M.SHAJNA

¶16

THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04-04-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

tss

¶18

T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, JJ.

¶19

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

¶20

R.C.R. No.353/2012

¶21

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

¶22

Dated this the 4^th day of April, 2013

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

Ramachandran Nair, J.

¶25

The tenant who has suffered an order passed by the Rent Control Court under Section 12(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (for short, 'the Act') is before this Court in this revision petition. The order passed by the Rent Control Court is pursuant to the order passed in I.A.No.413/2011 in R.C.P.No.63/2010. Alleging that the rent is in arrears from January, 2005 the I.A.No.413/2011 was filed.

¶26

A counter statement has been filed by the tenant in rent control petition. He raised a contention that as the roof of the petition schedule building where he was conducting a workshop fell down on 28/05/2005 he is not in a position to use the shed after the said date and therefore, he is not liable to pay the rent. The authorities have taken the view that as tenancy continues and as the tenant continues in possession of the building, he cannot refuse to deposit the rent in the light of the express provisions of Section 12 of the Act.

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioner canvassed the correctness of the same by pointing out that an application before the Tahsildar & Accommodation Controller, Kozhikode was being pursued by the tenant

¶28

R.C.R. No.353/2012

¶29

-:2:-

¶30

and therefore, he is entitled to adjust the rent payable to the cost of repair, ultimately, if the landlord is not making the repair. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the said argument has no merit since no orders are in force now.

¶31

At this stage, it may not be necessary for this Court to consider the said plea since as of now there is no order passed by the Accommodation Controller. One of the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that before passing the order, a show cause notice was not issued. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner never wanted to pay any amount. Therefore, there is no illegality in the matter. Here also, the petitioner's definite stand is that he is not liable to pay rent and he is trying to pursue his remedies before the Accommodation Controller. Therefore, we find no reason to interfere with the orders passed by the authorities below. The direction by the Rent Control Court in I.A.No.413/2011 in R.C.P.No.63/2010 dated 22/08/2011 is to deposit ` .46,900/- being the admitted arrears of rent upto and inclusive of December, 2010 on or before 19/09/2011. The rent was not deposited. Another order was passed on 23/11/2011 whereby all the proceedings were stopped and the tenant was directed to put the landlord in possession under Section 12(3) of the Act. The Appellate Authority also considered the contention raised by the petitioner that there is a collapse of roof. In

¶32

R.C.R. No.353/2012

¶33

-:3:-

¶34

fact, the Appellate Authority observed that there is an admission by the tenant that he has paid rent only upto 31/12/2004 and, therefore, in order to contest the application, the tenant is bound to pay the admitted arrears of rent. We are of the view, that the view taken by the Appellate Authority cannot be said to be perverse in the light of the express provisions of Section 12 of the Act. Therefore, we confirm the orders passed by the authorities below and dismiss the revision petition. If the petitioner is desirous of making payment, he will be at liberty to do so within one month from this date.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) Sd/-

¶37

(A.V. Ramakrishna Pillai, Judge.)

¶38

ms

K.Balaraman v. Cheriya Patha @ Fathima

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Balaraman v. Cheriya Patha @ Fathima

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri.S.Sunil Kumar Vs the Executive Engineer, Tdb, Thiruvananthapuram

Executive Engineer, Tdb, Mavelikara Vs the Deputy Director, Local Fund Audit, Tdb,Thiruvananthapuram

Executive Engineer, Tdb, Mavelikara Vs the Dy. Director, Local Fund Audit

Ummachu & Others Vs Thottiyil Muhammed Kutty

Suresh Vs Unnikrishnan

Sarathchandran Vs Abdul Azeez