Case Summary
Annam Mavely, the petitioner, is seeking eviction of Diaguncart Technologies Pvt. Ltd. due to non-payment of rent over several months, along with the unauthorized subleasing of the premises. The court found the evidence supporting the petitioner's claims and allowed the petition in part.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The respondent is directed to put the landlord/petitioner in possession of the petition schedule building within 30 days.
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Final Judgment
No
The petition was allowed in part, directing the respondent to vacate the premises and pay costs to the petitioner. The court noted the compelling evidence in favor of the petitioner's claims.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found the evidence of unpaid rent and unauthorized subleasing to be compelling and uncontroverted.
The court found the evidence of unpaid rent and unauthorized subleasing to be compelling and uncontroverted.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found the evidence of unpaid rent and unauthorized subleasing to be compelling and uncontroverted.
The court found the evidence of unpaid rent and unauthorized subleasing to be compelling and uncontroverted.
Supporting Evidence
The unrebutted oral testimony of PW1 and Exts. A1 to A3 established his case as pleaded by him. It shoes that is in arrears.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, The petition is allowed in part u/S 11(2)(b) and 11(3) of the Act with costs as follows: 1. The respondent/tenant is directed to put the landlord/petitioner in possession of the petition schedule building within 30 days from today.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Annam Mavely
- Party Age
- 76
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Santosh Joseph Mavely
- Party Age
- 51
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Diaguncart Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Plaintiffs Documents
Power of attorney dated 24.02.2024, Copy of lawyer’s notice dated 26.12.2023, Original acknowledgement card dated 27.12.2023
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Dinesh Mathew J. Murikan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Ria Varghese
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Jecry Peter
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Muhammed Thayib N.M.
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Partly Granted
Description:
The petitioner requested possession of the building due to non-payment of rent.
Evidence:
The respondent/tenant is directed to put the landlord/petitioner in possession of the petition schedule building within 30 days from today.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Not Decided
Description:
The petitioner sought relief under Section 11(3) of the Act for bonafide need.
Evidence:
Since the bonafide need was not proved by the petitioner, the prayer under Section 11(3) of the Act is disallowed.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Filed to establish the petitioner's authority in the case.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Copy of Lawyer's notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Used to demonstrate that the respondent was notified of the overdue rent.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Original acknowledgement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Provided evidence of receipt of the lawyer's notice by the respondent.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Case Classification
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Category
Eviction and Rent Control
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
Case between Annam Mavely vs Diaguncart Technologies Pvt. Ltd. regarding eviction due to rent arrears
Case Code Year
Case between Annam Mavely vs Diaguncart Technologies Pvt. Ltd. regarding eviction due to rent arrears