IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 397 of 2007(V)
1. RAMACHANDRAN, S/O.MAKKI,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. SHAJI LONAPPAN, S/O.LONAPPAN,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.MATHEW ABRAHAM
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.A.ABDUL GAFOOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.R.UDAYABHANU
Dated :04/01/2007
O R D E R
K.A. ABDUL GAFOOR & K.R. UDAYABHANU, JJ
=============================
W.P.(C). NO. 397 OF 2007
==============================
Dated this the 4th day of January 2007
JUDGMENT
Udayabhanu, J
The petitioner/tenant in R.C.P. 19/2005 in the file of Rent
Control Court, Aluva has filed the present Writ Petition. The writ
petitioner has sought for setting aside Ext.P3 order in I.A. No.
1063/2006 declining his prayer to appoint an expert
Commissioner to ascertain as to the feasibility of conversion into
a living space, of the premises which is right now used as a
commercial unit i.e., a photo studio. The court below dismissed
the application pointing out that the Advocate Commissioner has
already inspected the premises and filed a report. The case of
the landlord, as can be seen from Ext.P3 order, is that he
intended to carry out repairs and renovation in the building for
which he has sufficient funds and that he wanted to reside
therein.
2. It is the contention of the Writ Petitioner herein that the
landlord is a person having other buildings and that the petition is
W.P.(C). NO. 397 of 2007 2
filed with the only motive of evicting the Writ Petitioner. The
premises cannot be modified, renovated or converted into a
residential accommodation, it is alleged. We find that considering
the present day technological advances availability of expertise in
the area it cannot be held that a building even if old cannot be
renovated or remodelled so as to render convenient for
residential accommodation.
3. In the circumstances and in view of the fact that already
an Advocate Commission has inspected the premises and filed a
report, the order of the court below cannot be found fault with.
The Writ Petitioner can raise all his contentions in this regard at
the time of trial and adduce evidence and court shall consider
them independently and untrammeled by any of the observations
contained in this order.
The Writ Petition is dismissed in limine.
K.A. ABDUL GAFOOR, JUDGE
K.R. UDAYABHANU, JUDGE.
RV