P.U. Sidhique v. Zakariya 2025 INSC 1340 - Kerala Rent Control Act
Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 - Sections 11(2)(b), 12(1), 12(2), 12(3), 18 - The contention that in an Appeal challenging an eviction order under Section 12(3) , a fresh application under Section 12(1) is mandatory, is contrary to the explicit language of Sections 12 and 18 - Sections 12(1) and 12(3) procedure is to be primarily followed by the Rent Controller. It is essentially in cases where supervening events have taken place during the pendency of Appeal, that the parties have the liberty to file an application under Section 12 of the Act, 1965 once again before the Appellate Authority like where rent has been paid till the date of filing of the Appeal, but by the time the Appeal has matured for hearing, further rent has accrued, which has not been paid. In such a case, it would be open to the Appellate Authority to entertain a fresh application under Section 12(1) by the landlord and decide the same in accordance with the procedure stipulated under Section 12 (Para 32)
Interpretation of Statutes - While it is true that it is not for the Courts to reject or refuse to give effect to legislation merely on the grounds that the clear meaning of the legislation appears absurd to the judiciary, when forced to construe a provision, the meaning of which is open to question they will lean against any construction that would produce a result which appears to them to be absurd or unjust. (Para 34) More absurd a suggested conclusion of construction is, the more the Court will lean against that conclusion that is ordinarily so whether one is construing a contract or a statute. (Para 35) Courts must balance textual fidelity with interpretive wisdom, ensuring that laws are not applied mechanically without considering context or equity; but serve as true vehicles for the administration of justice. (Para 36)
Precedents -A judgment is not to be read like an Enactment or Statute. (Para 40)
Case Info
Key Details
- Case name: P.U. Sidhique & Ors. v. Zakariya
- Neutral citation: 2025 INSC 1340
- Coram: Justice Rajesh Bindal; Justice Manmohan
- Judgment date: November 21, 2025
Statutes / Laws Referred
- Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965: Sections 11(2)(b), 12(1), 12(2), 12(3), 18
- Code of Civil Procedure: Order VII Rule 11, Order XII Rule 6
Caselaws and Citations
- Manik Lal Majumdar & Ors. v. Gouranga Chandra Dey & Ors., (2005) 2 SCC 400
- Manik Lal Majumdar (two‑Judge reference), (2004) 12 SCC 448
- Lifestyle Equities & Anr. v. Amazon Technologies Inc., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2153
- Zeenath Ibrahim & Ors. v. Joy Daniel, 2024 SCC OnLine Ker 6489; also cited as 2024 (7) KHC 195
- Haridas P. R. v. Manoj, 2025 KHC 1613
- Rekha Mukherjee v. Ashish Kumar Das, (2004) 1 SCC 483
- Escorts Ltd. v. CCE, Delhi-II, (2004) 8 SCC 335
- State of Orissa v. Mohd. Illiyas, (2006) 1 SCC 275
- State of Karnataka v. C. Lalitha, (2006) 2 SCC 747
- CCE, Delhi v. Allied Air-Conditioning Corpn. (Regd.), (2006) 7 SCC 735
#SupremeCourt clarifies on necessity of a fresh application at appellate stage under Section 12 Kerala Rent Control Act: https://t.co/d01FH4HiO1 pic.twitter.com/SLBJxfZBcx
— CiteCase 🇮🇳 (@CiteCase) November 21, 2025
While it is true that it is not for the Courts to reject or refuse to give effect to legislation merely on the grounds that the clear meaning of the legislation appears absurd to the judiciary, when forced to construe a provision, the meaning of which is open to question they… https://t.co/d01FH4GKYt pic.twitter.com/KUZrhkuCGI
— CiteCase 🇮🇳 (@CiteCase) November 21, 2025