Supreme Court Clarifies Requirements of Section 12 Applications in Rent Control Appeals.

Headnote:

The Supreme Court examined whether landlords must file a fresh application under Section 12(1) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 before the Appellate Rent Control Authority when the tenant appeals against an eviction order passed under Section 12(3). The Court held that while filing such an application is permissible, it is not mandatory in every appeal. The appellate process need not replicate the entire Section 12 procedure again. The High Court’s contrary view was set aside, and the matter was remanded.

Background:

• Two commercial shops in Kochi were rented by the respondent–tenant from the appellants–landlords.

• The tenant defaulted on rent from early 2020, leading to eviction petitions under Section 11(2)(b).

• In 2023, a civil suit was decreed in favour of the landlords for arrears.

• The landlords filed applications under Section 12(1), leading the Rent Controller (Sept 2024) to direct the tenant to deposit arrears and continue paying rent.

• The tenant failed to comply, and the Rent Controller passed eviction orders under Section 12(3) on 7 November 2024.

• The tenant filed appeals under Section 18 before the Appellate Authority.

• The Appellate Authority directed the tenant to deposit rent by 15 March 2025; non-compliance led to stopping of appeal proceedings under Section 12(3).

• The High Court (22 May 2025) reversed this, holding that the landlords should have filed a fresh Section 12(1) application in Appeal.

Court’s Observations:

• Section 12(1) requires tenants to clear arrears and continue paying rent to contest eviction or appeals.

• Section 12(3) mandates stopping proceedings and ordering eviction on non-compliance.

• The Appellate Authority’s role is supervisory—repeating the entire Section 12 procedure is unnecessary unless warranted by new circumstances.

• A fresh Section 12(1) application is maintainable in Appeals (i.e., legally allowed).

• But it is not compulsory for landlords to file a new Section 12(1) application in every appeal.

• The Court clarified the Full Bench decision in Zeenath Ibrahim v. Joy Daniel (2024), confirming that it does not require automatic repetition of Section 12 steps.

• Mechanical duplication of Section 12 would burden the system and delay eviction processes contrary to legislative intent.

Decision / Holding:

• Appeals partly allowed.

• High Court’s order is set aside.

• The matter is remanded to the Appellate Authority to proceed in accordance with law, considering:

– whether a Section 12(1) application is filed, and

– whether conditions should be imposed on the tenant under Section 12.

• The Court reiterates that fresh Section 12(1) applications are optional, not mandatory, in appeals against Section 12(3) eviction orders.

Legal Provisions Discussed:

• Section 12(1) – Tenant’s obligation to deposit arrears/admitted rent to contest proceedings.

• Section 12(3) – Stopping proceedings and ordering eviction on failure to comply.

• Section 18 – Appellate powers under the Kerala Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act, 1965.

• Relevant precedent: Zeenath Ibrahim v. Joy Daniel (Full Bench, Kerala High Court, 2024).

Citation: 2025 INSC 1340

Case: P.U. Sidhiqué & Ors. v. Zakariya

Court: Supreme Court of India – Civil Appellate Jurisdiction

Date of Decision: 21 November 2025

Civil Appeal Nos.: 13901–13902 of 2025

(Arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 22696–22697 of 2025)