Case Summary
The case involves a petition by Mathew Ninan and Leela Mathew against Sujith P.S. and Rathna K.V. regarding compliance with rent arrears under the Kerala Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act. The respondents failed to comply with the court's order, leading to the petitioners seeking possession of the property.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Directed the respondent to put the petitioner in vacant possession of the building forthwith.
Case Type
Rent Control
Final Judgment
No
The court ordered the respondents to comply with the previous order regarding rent arrears, which they failed to do. Consequently, the petitioners were granted possession of the property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The respondents failed to comply with the court's order and did not show sufficient cause for their non-compliance.
The respondents failed to comply with the court's order and did not show sufficient cause for their non-compliance.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The respondents failed to comply with the court's order and did not show sufficient cause for their non-compliance.
The respondents failed to comply with the court's order and did not show sufficient cause for their non-compliance.
Supporting Evidence
The respondent having failed to comply with the order in IA 2/2025 and having failed to show sufficient cause for not depositing rent arrears is liable to suffer consequence under Section 12(3) of the Act.
Judgment Evidence:
Hence an order is passed under Section 12(3) of the Act stopping all the further proceedings in the rent control petition and directing the respondent to put the petitioner in vacant possession of the building forthwith.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Mathew Ninan
- Party Age
- 81
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Leela Mathew
- Party Age
- 80
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sujith P.S.
- Party Age
- 39
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Rathna K.V.
- Party Age
- 65
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Not mentioned
Defendants Documents
Not mentioned
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Mathew Skaria
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Tomy Paul
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Thomas Mathew
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Abraham K. John
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Uthara Asokan
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Respondent is directed to put the petitioner in vacant possession of the building forthwith.
Evidence:
Hence an order is passed under Section 12(3) of the Act stopping all the further proceedings in the rent control petition and directing the respondent to put the petitioner in vacant possession of the building forthwith.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Rent Control
Category
Eviction and Rent Control
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Mathew Ninan et al vs Sujith P.S. et al regarding Rent Control
Case Code Year
Case between Mathew Ninan et al vs Sujith P.S. et al regarding Rent Control