Case Summary
Muhammed Abdul Sathar, the petitioner, seeks eviction of Kathyasanveettil Nazar, the respondent, from a property based on the claim of bona fide need for his son to conduct business. The respondent disputes the landlord-tenant relationship and claims that the petitioner has other available properties.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The respondents are directed to put the petitioner in vacant possession of the petition schedule building within one month from the date of this order.
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Final Judgment
No
The petition for eviction filed by Muhammed Abdul Sathar was allowed, granting him vacant possession of the property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The petitioner demonstrated bona fide need for the property for his son’s business and established the landlord-tenant relationship.
The petitioner demonstrated bona fide need for the property for his son’s business and established the landlord-tenant relationship.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
This court is satisfied that the relationship between the petitioner is that on landlord and tenant. The said point is answered in favour of the petitioner.
Judgment Evidence:
The rent control petition is allowed under section 11 (3),11(4)(v) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act 1965. The respondents are directed to put the petitioner in vacant possession of the petition schedule building within one month from the date of this order.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Muhammed Abdul Sathar
- Party Age
- 75
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Ramil Ummar
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Shiril Muhammad
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Kathyasanveettil Nazar
- Party Age
- 50
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Original License Agreement executed between petitioner and respondent, Notice sent by Asst. Executive Engineer Water Authority, Receipt issued from Kerala Water Authority, Copy of Lawyer Notice.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Smt.Sindu.A
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri.N.Jalaludheen
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Eviction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Order of eviction under section 11(3) and section 11(4)(v) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act 1965.
Evidence:
The rent control petition is allowed under section 11 (3),11(4)(v) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act 1965.
Relief Type:
Cost
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Respondent is directed to pay costs of the proceedings to the petitioner.
Evidence:
The normal rule is that cost shall follow event.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
License Agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original License Agreement executed between petitioner and respondent.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Notice sent by Asst. Executive Engineer Water Authority to petitioner.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Receipt issued from Kerala Water Authority.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Lawyer Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of Lawyer Notice.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission Report by Noorudheen K.P, Advocate Commissioner.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Photograph
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Photograph related to the Commission Report.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Category
Eviction and Rent Control
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 2 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Eviction
Case Code
Case between Muhammed Abdul Sathar vs Kathyasanveettil Nazar regarding eviction under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act.
Case Code Year
Case between Muhammed Abdul Sathar vs Kathyasanveettil Nazar regarding eviction under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act.