Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
RENT CONTROL PETITION NO. 9 OF 2019

Case between Mohamed Noushad et al vs Abdul Majeed et al regarding eviction under Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act

Court
RENT CONTROL COURT
Judge
Sri. JANKISH NARAYANAN
Order Date
2019-10-31
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The petitioners, including Mohamed Noushad and P. Saleena, filed for eviction of the respondents, Abdul Majeed and Mohammed Askar, asserting that the respondents sublet the property without permission and that the petitioner needs the property for his grandson to start a business. The case alleges misuse of the property and failure to comply with eviction notices.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court ordered the respondents to vacate the premises and granted the petitioners the cost of the proceedings. The petition was allowed as the petitioners demonstrated a bona fide need for the property.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Respondents directed to give vacant possession of the petition schedule building within three months.
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Final Judgment
No
The court ordered the respondents to vacate the premises and granted the petitioners the cost of the proceedings. The petition was allowed as the petitioners demonstrated a bona fide need for the property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The petitioners provided credible evidence of their bona fide need for the property, and the respondents failed to contest.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The petitioners provided credible evidence of their bona fide need for the property, and the respondents failed to contest.
Supporting Evidence
The evidence adduced by the petitioners remain unchallenged. After considering the evidence, I am satisfied that the petitioners have successfully proved that they bona fide require the building for petitioner No.3 to conduct a business therein.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the petition is allowed under Ss. 11 (3), 11 (4) (1) and 11(4) (ii) of the Kerala Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act as follows: I The respondents are directed to give vacant possession of the petition schedule building bearing No. XX/995 of the Tirur Municipality to the petitioners within three months from today.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Mohamed Noushad
Party Age
50
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
P. Saleena
Party Age
40
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Mohammed Dilbar
Party Age
19
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Abdul Majeed
Party Age
50
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Mohammed Askar
Party Age
50
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Lawyer notice dated 22-1-2019, Postal receipt, Postal acknowledgment card
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. M.K. Moosakutty
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. T.R. Vijayan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Eviction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Order of eviction against the respondents to vacate the building.
Evidence:
Therefore, I am satisfied that the petitioner has proved her case by adducing cogent and reliable evidence.
Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Entitlement to realize the costs of the petition from the respondents.
Evidence:
the petitioner is entitled to realise the cost of the proceedings from respondents.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Issued to demand the surrender of vacant possession of the building.
Reference:
Ext.A1(a)
Document Type: Postal receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Serves as proof of sending the lawyer notice.
Reference:
Ext.A1(b)
Document Type: Postal Acknowledgment Card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Acknowledgment of receipt of the lawyer notice.
Reference:
Ext.A1(c)
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Submitted by Advocate Commissioner detailing the condition of the building.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Commission Plan
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Plan submitted by Advocate Commissioner related to the building.
Reference:
Ext.C2

Case Classification

Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Category
Eviction and Rent Control
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Unauthorized occupation
Case Code
Case between Mohamed Noushad et al vs Abdul Majeed et al regarding eviction under Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act
Case Code Year
Case between Mohamed Noushad et al vs Abdul Majeed et al regarding eviction under Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act

Quick Facts

Location
TIRUR
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Tue, 10/01/2019 - 12:00
To
Thu, 10/31/2019 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Erachampatt Haleema vs P.Abdul Gafoor regarding eviction of tenant from shop room
COURT OF THE RENT CONTROL OF TIRUR
Rent Control Petition Plaintiff Won
Case between Muhammed Faizal.P.T et al vs Sakeer Husain regarding rent control
Munsiff Magistrate Court
Rent Control Petition Dismissed
Case between Parayil Muhammedkutty vs Kinassery Parambil Sugathan regarding rental agreement settlement
Rent Controller of Tirur
Rent Control Petition Partial
Case between Beeran Haji vs Ali regarding rent control petition
Rent Controller of Tirur
Rent Control Petition Plaintiff Won
Case between Shabna et al vs Mohamedkutty regarding rent control
Court of the Rent Controller of Tirur
Rent Control Petition Plaintiff Won