In this rent control revision, the Kerala High Court dismissed the petition challenging the enhancement of daily rent from `16 to `25 for a shop room. The bench held that the rate was not exorbitant considering the area and local commercial context, and no legal issue warranted interference.
Revision dismissed; enhanced rent of `25 per day upheld.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA
MONDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2013/25TH AGRAHAYANA, 1935
RCRev..No. 406 of 2013 ()
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN RCA 25/2010 of RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, TIRUR
AGAINST THE ORDER IN RCP 2/2010 of RENT CONTROL COURT, PONNANI
REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:
UMMER, AGED 63 YEARS
S/O.MAMMIKUTTY, KOLATHIL VALAPPIL HOUSE, POKKARATHARA P.O.KOLLOLLAMBU, PONNANI TALUK.
BY ADV. SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:
MOHAMMED,, AGED 64 YEARS
S/O.ABDULLA, THEKKUMKATTIL HOUSE, KOLOLAMBU AMSOM POKKARATHARA DESOM, PONNANI TALUK.
THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-12-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & B.KEMAL PASHA, JJ. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
R.C.R.No.406/2013
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 16th day of December, 2013
O R D E R
Ramachandran Nair, J.
The tenant of a building, who is aggrieved by the fixation of fair rent
is the petitioner herein. The Rent Control Court has enhanced daily rent
from 16/- to 25/- for the shop room in question.
C.M.Mohammed Iquabal, who submitted that the Rent Control Court as
well as the Appellate Authority has fixed an exorbitant rent. According to
the learned counsel, the tenant was agreeable to fix it at `19/-. It is
submitted that various circumstances which have been specified by this
Court in Edger Ferus v. Abraham Ittycheria [2004 (1) KLT 767] have not
been fully applied by the authorities below.
the parties did not dispute regarding the enhancement of rent and, what
was disputed is the rate of enhancement. The argument of the learned
R.C.R.No.406/2013
-:2:-
counsel for the tenant was that there was no evidence for inflation during
the period in question. It has come out in evidence that after the year 2005, the rent has not been increased. The place is called Pookkarathara
which is stated to be only 2kms. away from Edappal Town. According to the learned counsel for the tenant, it is only a remote village but the finding
is otherwise as it is mentioned that Edappal town is a commercial hub and various commercial activities are there. Taking into consideration the fact that the last enhancement was in the year 2005, the rate of daily rent has been enhanced to `25/- for each room. The Appellate Authority has also considered the matter in detail. It is observed in paragraph (10) that considering various aspects such as reduction in money value, variation in
the cost of living index, locational importance etc., the rent has to be
enhanced as rightly held by the Rent Control Court.
a small dealer in cement, stones and bricks and the enhancement will
really effect him.
R.C.R.No.406/2013
-:3:-
5. We are of the view that going by the measurement of the
petition schedule rooms, which is stated to be 90 sq.mts. each (totalling to
180 sq.mts), it will only be around `4/- per sq.ft. Therefore, it cannot be
said that the rate is exorbitant. As far as the said aspect is concerned,
there is no legal issue involved for interference in revision also. Therefore,
we dismiss the rent control revision.
Sd/-
(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge)
Sd/-
(B.Kemal Pasha, Judge)
ms
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the enhanced rent of `25/- per day is exorbitant and liable to be reduced.
Whether the Rent Control Court and Appellate Authority correctly applied the principles for rent fixation.
UMMER
MOHAMMED
T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
B. KEMAL PASHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
