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

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
R.C.P. No. 34/2025

Case between Mansoor Shams et al vs Seetta G.S. regarding eviction under the Kerala Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act.

Court
COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Smt. REEJA R. NAIR
Order Date
2025-12-06
Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The petitioners, Mansoor Shams and his wife Jaseela, seek to evict Seetta G.S., their tenant who failed to pay rent and vacate the premises after the lease expired. The court found the petitioners' claims valid and unchallenged by the respondent.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The petition for eviction was allowed due to the tenant's failure to pay rent and comply with the lease agreement. The tenant must vacate the premises within 30 days.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The respondent/tenant 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
Why Plaintiff Won:
The petitioners proved their entitlement to eviction under Section 11(2)(b) and 11(3) of the Act due to failure to pay rent and bona fide need for occupation.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence, point No. 1 found in favor of the petitioner, and are entitled to get a relief under section 11(2)(b) of the Act.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Mansoor Shams (65 years) Malikayil House, 72/623, Deshabhimani Road, Kaloor P.O., Elamkulam Village, Kanayannoor Taluk, Ernakulam District, Kerala, PIN - 682017 Jaseela, Mansoor (57 years) Malikayil House. 72/623, Deshabhimani Road, Kaloor P.O., Elamkulam Village, Kanayannoor Taluk, Ernakulam District, PIN - 682017.

Defendants

Seetta G.S. (24 years) Thulavila, Kottapuram P.O., Vizhinjam, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, Pin- 695521.

Reliefs

Relief Type: Eviction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The respondent/tenant is directed to put the landlord/petitioner in possession of the petition schedule building.
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: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The petitioner is entitled to recover costs of the petition from the respondent.
Evidence:
The petitioner is entitled to get the costs of the petition from the respondent.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Lease Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The lease agreement establishes the terms under which the respondent was to vacate the building.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Copy of the lawyer's notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This notice was sent to inform the respondent of the need to vacate the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Postal receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The postal receipt serves as proof of sending the lawyer's notice to the respondent.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Returned envelope along with acknowledgment card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This exhibits evidence of the respondent's refusal to accept the lawyer's notice.
Reference:
Ext.A4 series

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam District, Kerala
Case Filed
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases