Skip to main content
Niyamam AI- Beta Niyamam AI- Beta

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
R.C.P. No. 05/2023

Case between Babu. K. Putheth vs Muhammed Rameez M.J. regarding eviction under Section 11(2) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act 1965.

Court
COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER
Judge
Smt. REEJA R. NAIR
Order Date
2025-09-27
Duration
approximately-2 years 8 months

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Babu. K. Putheth, the petitioner, is seeking eviction of Muhammed Rameez M.J., the respondent, for non-payment of rent. The case revolves around a rental agreement that the respondent allegedly defaulted on since April 2021.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court ordered the respondent to vacate the rented premises within 30 days due to non-payment of rent. The petitioner was also awarded the costs of the proceedings.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The respondent is directed to give vacant possession of the petition scheduled building within 30 days.
Case Type
Eviction
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The petitioner established that the respondent has defaulted on rent payments and provided sufficient evidence supporting his claim.

Judgment Evidence:

The petition is allowed as follows; i. The respondent is directed to give vacant possession of the petition scheduled building to the petitioners within 30 days from today under Section 11(2)(b) of the Act.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Babu. K. Putheth (60 years years) 33/1962-B, Sobha Road, Vennala P.O, Kochi - 682028, now residing at 32 Judson Street 14 A, Edison, NJ 08837, USA

Defendants

Muhammed Rameez M.J. (26 years years) Mulakkampilly House, Padamukal Junction, Kakkanad P.O, Kakkanad, Ernakulam-682 030

Reliefs

Relief Type: Eviction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The petitioner requested the eviction of the respondent from the petition schedule building.
Evidence:
The petitioner is entitled to get an order of eviction under section 11(2)(b) of the Act.
Relief Type: Cost Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The petitioner requested to recover the costs of the proceedings from the respondent.
Evidence:
The petitioner is entitled to receive the costs of the proceedings from the respondent.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Leave and License Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document establishes the rental agreement between the petitioner and the respondent.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Power of Attorney
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document authorizes Pramod Das Lohya to represent the petitioner in the court.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Lawyer's Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was used to prove that the petitioner issued a notice demanding arrears of rent.
Reference:
Ext.A3

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Wed, 01/20/2021 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
95%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases