Chitambaresh, J.
The plaint schedule building of plinth area 4000 square feet was let out to the first defendant on rent ofcourse on approval of the terms by the second defendant. It is conceded that the first defendant has been occupying the premises since 16.5.1996 and that the rent has fallen in arrears. The suit was filed seeking eviction of the first defendant from the premises and also claiming arrears of rent at the rate of ` 12,000/- per month till vacant possession.
2. The defendants were set ex parte and the court below has by the impugned judgment held that the plaintiffs are entitled to rent at the rate fixed by the Government. The contention of the plaintiffs that the arrangement is only a licence and not a lease has not been accepted holding that the first defendant is only a tenant. The eviction AS.No.141/2000 2 sought has also been disallowed on the ground that recourse should be had under the Kerala Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act. The plaintiffs have not filed any appeal against the decree to the extent it prejudices them and only the defendants have come up in this Appeal Suit.
3. The short point is as to whether the decree passed by the court below could be sustained on the evidence on record even if the defendants had been set ex parte. Whether there are sufficient grounds to set aside the ex parte decree is beside the point since the same are matters for probe under Order IX Rule 13 CPC only. Only the plaintiffs have produced documents which are Ext.A1 power of attorney and Ext.A2 lawyer notice and Ext.A3 reply notice.
4. It transpires that the Government has fixed rent at the rate of ` 6416/- per month with effect from 1.7.1996 as per G.O.(Rt) No.1644/98/LAD dated 27.5.1998. We are only concerned with the arrears of rent from 16.5.1996 till the date of plaint (18.2.1998) since the rate of rent fixed is AS.No.141/2000 3 valid for three years only. The defendants have a contention that substantial payments made by them towards rent have not been given credit to by the court below. Interest of justice would be met by directing the Execution Court to look into the payments if any made towards rent and give credit to the same before recording full satisfaction.
5. The plaintiffs are given a decree for a sum of ` 6416/- per month for the period from 16.5.1996 till 18.2.1998 with interest thereon at 6% per annum for delayed payment. The amounts if any already paid towards arrears of rent for the above period shall be given credit to at the time of execution of the decree.
The Appeal Suit is disposed of. No costs.
Sd/-
V.CHITAMBARESH, JUDGE Sd/-
SATHISH NINAN, JUDGE nj/04.01.2017 //True copy// P.S. to Judge.