ORDER : P.B. SURESH KUMAR, J. 1. Could an entry in a property tax or house tax assessment book maintained by a local authority relating to the occupancy or vacancy of a building be received as evidence of the said fact in the light of Section 26 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (the Act) in a proceedings for eviction under the Act, is the pivotal question to be answered in this reference. 2. The bare facts of the case need to be stated for a proper consideration of the question. The reference arises from a rent control revision filed under Section 20 of the Act. The landlords in a proceedings for eviction under the Act are the petitioners in the revision. They sought eviction of the tenant of a building on the ground of bonafide need. The Rent Control Court did not consider the issue whether the need set up by the landlords is bonafide. Instead, it went straight to the first proviso to Section 11(3) of the Act and held that the landlords are in possession of more than one vacant room and as the said room can be made use of for their need, they are not entitled to evict the tenant. The said decision has been affirmed in appeal by the Appellate Authority. The decisions of the Rent Control Court and the Appellate Authority are under challenge in the revision. 3. The Division Bench before which the matter came up noticed that the Rent Control Court and the Appellate Authority came to the conclusion that there are vacant rooms in possession of the landlords in the light of Section 26 of the Act, solely based on the entries in Ext.B1 certified extract of the property tax assessment book maintained by the local authority. It appeared to the Division Bench that the decisions of the Division Benches of this Court on the question, viz, the decisions in Abdul Kader v. George Joseph and Another [ 2009 (1) KLT 205 ] and in Nabeesa Abdul Khader v. Suresh Kurian [ 2009 (1) KLT 1020 ], on one hand, and the decision in Cheruvalath Krishnadasan v. Addissery Raghavan [ 2017 (4) KHC 894 (DB)] on the other hand, are in conflict. It is in the said circumstances that the question was referred by the Bench for decision by a Full Bench. 4. It is in the said circumstances that the question was referred by the Bench for decision by a Full Bench. 4. Heard the learned counsel on either side. 5. As the object and purpose of the provision contained in Section 26 of the Act need to be examined for answering the reference, it is apposite to quote the said provision: “26. Executive authorities of local bodies to furnish certified extracts from property tax or house tax assessment books.--The executive authority of a Municipal Council 1[or Township Committee] or Panchayat or the Revenue Officer of a Corporation shall, on application made in this behalf and on payment of such fee as may, from time to time, be fixed by the Government by notification in the Gazette, grant to the applicant a certified copy of extract from the property tax or house tax assessment book of the Municipal Council 1[or Township Committee] or Panchayat Corporation, as the case may be showing the rental value of the building or buildings in respect of which application has been made, relating to the period specified in the application. Such certified copy shall be received as evidence of the facts stated therein in proceedings under this Act.” As discernible from the quoted provision, it makes it obligatory for the local bodies to grant, on application, certified copies of the extracts from the property tax or house tax assessment books showing the rental value of buildings relating to the periods specified in the application and the authorities under the Act are bound to receive such certified copies as evidence of the facts stated therein. There is no reference of the property tax or house tax assessment book maintained by the local authority anywhere else in the Act. Section 5 of the Act, of course, refers to property tax or house tax register of the local authority. As there is no reason to attribute different meanings to the words 'book' and 'register' used in different provisions of the Act, we are proceeding as if the said words carry the same meaning. Section 5 is the provision in the Act dealing with determination of fair rent of buildings covered by the Act. Sub-section (1) of Section 5 confers power on the Rent Control Court to fix the fair rent of buildings. Section 5 is the provision in the Act dealing with determination of fair rent of buildings covered by the Act. Sub-section (1) of Section 5 confers power on the Rent Control Court to fix the fair rent of buildings. Sub-section (2) of Section 5 provides that in fixing the fair rent, the Court shall take into consideration the property tax or house tax fixed for the building at the time of letting in the property tax register or house tax register of the local authority. The said sub-section also provides that the fair rent fixed in terms of Section 5 shall, in no case, exceed by more than fifteen percent the monthly rent on the basis of which the property tax or house tax for the building, prevailing two years immediately before the date of the application, was fixed. Insofar as Section 5 mandates that the Rent Control Court shall ensure that the fair rent fixed in the case of buildings subjected to property tax or house tax assessments by the local authorities shall not exceed by more than fifteen percent of the monthly rent on the basis of which the property tax or house tax for the building, prevailing two years immediately before the date of application was fixed, it is obligatory for the parties to let in evidence as to the monthly rent on the basis of which the property tax or house tax of the building, prevailing two years immediately before the date of the application was fixed in proceedings under Section 5 of the Act. In the absence of any reference of the property tax register or house tax register of the local authority elsewhere in the Act, there is no difficulty in arriving at the conclusion that Section 26 of the Act is only a provision which enables the parties to the proceedings under sub-section (1) of Section 5 the Act to let in evidence as to the rental value of the buildings as fixed by the local authority for the relevant period for the purpose of levying property tax or house tax, as the case may be, by producing certified copies of the extracts from the property tax or house tax assessment book of the local authority. The said purpose of Section 26 is evident also from the expression 'showing the rental value of the building or buildings in respect of which the application has been made' used in the Section. A doubt would arise as to whether such a provision was necessary to enable the parties to the proceedings under Section 5 of the Act to let in evidence as to the rental value of the buildings fixed by the local authority, for the property tax or house tax assessment registers maintained by the local authorities being public documents, Section 77 of the Indian evidence Act 1872 enables production of the certified copies of the same in proof of the contents of such documents. But, it appears to us that the first part of the Section is to make it obligatory for the local authorities to grant certified copies of extracts from their property tax or house tax assessment books for the purposes of the Act and the second part of the Section is only a clarificatory provision. The second part clarifies that it is sufficient for the parties to produce the certified extracts of the property tax or house tax assessment book in order to prove the facts stated therein. In short, the provision contained in Section 26 of the Act is a provision included in the Act on grounds of convenience to obviate production of the originals of the property tax or house tax assessment registers maintained by the local authorities for evidentiary purpose. Having thus understood the object and purpose of Section 26 of the Act, we shall proceed to answer the question referred. 6. As noted, Section 26 of the Act is only a provision which enables the parties to a proceedings under sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the Act to let in evidence as to the rental value of the buildings as fixed by the local authority for the relevant period for the purpose of levying property tax or house tax, as the case may be, by producing certified copies of the extracts from the property tax or house tax assessment books of the local authority. The scheme of the Act does not indicate that the legislature intended the parties to a proceeding for eviction under the Act to prove the vacancy or occupancy of a building by producing certified extracts of the property tax or the building tax assessment books of the local authority. The said certified extracts can at best be a piece of evidence and the occupancy of the building needs to be established by the parties by other corroborative evidence. 7. In the above background, we have to examine the correctness of the decisions referred to in the reference order. The view taken by this Court in Cheruvalath Krishnadasan (supra) that the entries in the property tax assessment register cannot be taken as conclusive proof of the vacancy position of a building conforms to the provisions of the Act and, therefore, in order. In Nabeesa Abdul Khader (supra), this Court did not hold that an entry in a property tax or building tax assessment register can be received as evidence to establish the vacancy position of a building. Instead, this Court has only held that a presumption can be drawn based on an entry in a property tax or building tax assessment register relating to occupancy or vacancy of the building and it is for the opposite party to dislodge the said presumption. Having understood the scope of Section 26 of the Act as indicated above, there is absolutely no basis for any such presumption. As entries are made in the property tax and building tax assessment registers of the local authorities as part of official acts, even dehors Section 26 of the Act, the courts are entitled to presume that such entries have been made in the regular course of business in the light of illustration (e) of Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. But, illustration (e) in the said provision permits only presumption to be drawn in matters of procedure. It does not permit a presumption to be drawn where the question does not relate to the manner of doing an official act. The decision in Nabeesa Abdul Khader (supra) is, therefore, to be clarified to that effect. Coming to the decision in Abdul Kader (supra), the Division Bench has held that an entry in the property tax or building tax assessment register maintained by the local authority is evidence of the vacancy position of a building. The decision in Nabeesa Abdul Khader (supra) is, therefore, to be clarified to that effect. Coming to the decision in Abdul Kader (supra), the Division Bench has held that an entry in the property tax or building tax assessment register maintained by the local authority is evidence of the vacancy position of a building. The said decision, according to us, cannot be accepted as correct and the same is liable to be overruled and we do so. The reference is answered accordingly. The Registry is directed to place the matter before the Division Bench for a decision on merits.