Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: tenancy devolving in T. Dhanalakshmi (Died) vs Thekkeyil Gopinath on 18 July, 2024Matching Fragments
AMIT RAWAL, J.
1. The present petition is directed against the order of RCP No.47 of 2018 dated 30.08.2024 and judgment of appellate authority dated 29.11.2023 in RCA No.102 of 2022 by upholding the eviction of the petitioner - tenant by rejecting the plea of kudikidappukaran as defined in Section 2(25) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963.
2. Respondent - landlord instituted an eviction petition against the petitioner under Section 11(2)(b) arrears of rent 11(3) bona fide need, section 11(4)(ii) for diminishing the value and utility and section 11(4)(iv) for reconstruction, of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 on the premise that the scheduled building originally belonged to his father Sri.Sreedharan and by virtue of settlement deed bearing No.2212/2009 of the SRO, Chalapuram respondent - landlord became the owner. The aforementioned building was entrusted to the predecessors-in- interest of the petitioner - tenant deemed in Narayana Shetty by one Kuttan predecessor - in-interest of the respondent landlord as per the registered agreement bearing No.485/1932. The tenancy rights devolved upon the petitioner - tenant and attorned the respondent - landlord by paying the rent at the rate of Rs.50/- (Rupees Fifty only) per month till December, 2015 and thereafter defaulted and sought the eviction on the grounds referred to above by referring that the building has been allotted a number i.e., 7/121 and 7/122.
8. Resisting the petition, the respondents filed a detailed counter. The respondents admitted that their predecessor in interest, Narayanan Shetty had obtained the building on lease as per the registered lease agreement bearing No. 485/1932 from Kuttan. They also admitted that after death of Narayanan Shetty, the tenancy right devolved upon them and the monthly rent payable by them is Rs.50/-. Apart from the above contention, they would contend that they have 'Kudikidappu' right over the petition schedule building and therefore the matter isliable to be referred to the Land Tribunal.