Case Summary
Petitioners seek eviction of the respondent from a building due to bonafide need for conducting a hardware and paints business, while alleging respondent's misuse diminishing the building's value.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Eviction to obtain vacant possession of the building
Case Type
Eviction Petition - Rent Control
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the eviction petition under section 11(3) of the Kerala Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, directing the respondent to vacate the building within two months.
Why Plaintiff Won:
Need for conducting hardware and paints business and misuse by the respondent diminishing building value.
Need for conducting hardware and paints business and misuse by the respondent diminishing building value.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Need for conducting hardware and paints business and misuse by the respondent diminishing building value.
Need for conducting hardware and paints business and misuse by the respondent diminishing building value.
Supporting Evidence
Since the respondents opted to remain exparte, the evidence adduced by the petitioners remained unchallenged. Therefore, I find no reason to disbelieve the bonafide needs put forward by the petitioner.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the petition is allowed under section 11(3) of the Kerala Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act 1965 as follows: a) The respondent is directed to put the petitioner in vacant possession of the petition schedule building within two months from today. b) The petitioner is entitled to realise the cost of the petition from the respondent.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Mohamed Rafi
- Party Age
- 44
- Relation
- S/o Kadavath Chereparambath Mohammed @ Bava
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Rosna
- Party Age
- 30
- Relation
- D/o Kadavath Chereparambath Mohammed @ Bava
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Fathima Bincy
- Party Age
- 28
- Relation
- D/o Kadavath Chereparambath Mohammed @ Bava
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Iyyathkutty @ Malummu
- Party Age
- 61
- Relation
- W/o Kadavath Chereparambath Mohammed @ Bava
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sahida @ Safira
- Party Age
- 37
- Relation
- D/o Valappil Bava
Plaintiffs Documents
Chief affidavit filed
Defendants Documents
Nil
Advocates
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Eviction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Eviction to obtain vacant possession of the building
Evidence:
In the result, the petition is allowed under section 11(3) of the Kerala Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act 1965 as follows: a) The respondent is directed to put the petitioner in vacant possession of the petition schedule building within two months from today. b) The petitioner is entitled to realise the cost of the petition from the respondent.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Chief Affidavit
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Filed by the Chief Affidavit by PW1 Iyyathukutty @ Malummu
Reference:
Unknown
Case Classification
Case Type
Eviction Petition - Rent Control
Category
Eviction and Rent Control
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Mohamed Rafi et al vs Sahida regarding eviction request
Case Code Year
Case between Mohamed Rafi et al vs Sahida regarding eviction request