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

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
R.C.P. No. 124/2020

Case between Parvathy Antharjanam et al vs Lalitha et al regarding eviction from the schedule building

Court
THE COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER, ERNAKULAM
Judge
SMT. REEJA R. NAIR
Order Date
2024-08-12
Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The petitioners, legal heirs of late Sankara Narayanan Bhattathirippad, seek eviction of the respondents, who are tenants in a commercial property. The court allowed the petitioners' request for eviction due to the respondents' failure to appear.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court granted the petitioners' request to evict the respondents from the schedule building, allowing them possession within 30 days.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The petitioners established their case due to the respondents' failure to appear.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the petition is allowed with costs as follows. 1. The respondents 2 to 4/tenants are hereby directed to put the landlord/petitioners in possession of the schedule building under Section 11(3) of the Act within 30 days from today.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Parvathy Antharjanam (74 years) Sreesylam-Edathamaramana, 37/1953, Kaloor-Kadavanthra Road, Kaloor P.O., Pin-682 017 E.S. Madhu (51 years) Sreesylam-Edathamaramana, 37/1953, Kaloor-Kadavanthra Road, Kaloor P.O., Pin-682 017 E.S. Mahesh (49 years) Sreesylam-Edathamaramana, 37/1953, Kaloor-Kadavanthra Road, Kaloor P.O., Pin-682 017 E.A. Sreedharan Bhattathiripad (84 years) Rajasree-Edathamaramana, 63/477, Central School Road, Kadavanthra P.O, Pin-682 020 Nalini Antharjanam (72 years) Rajasree-Edathamaramana, 63/477, Central School Road, Kadavanthra P.O, Pin-682 020

Defendants

Lalitha (75 years) Karathatt Agencies, C.C. 55/1037, Ground floor, Edathamaramana Shopping Complex (E.M.S. Shopping Complex), Kadavanthara, Kochi-682 020 Ajithkumar (Age not specified years) Karathatt Agencies, C.C. 55/1037, Ground floor, Edathamaramana Shopping Complex (E.M.S. Shopping Complex), Kadavanthara, Kochi-682 020 Anitha K.S. (Age not specified years) Karathatt Agencies, C.C. 55/1037, Ground floor, Edathamaramana Shopping Complex (E.M.S. Shopping Complex), Kadavanthara, Kochi-682 020

Reliefs

Relief Type: Eviction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The respondents are directed to vacate the schedule building.
Evidence:
The respondents 2 to 4/tenants are hereby directed to put the landlord/petitioners in possession of the schedule building under Section 11(3) of the Act within 30 days from today.
Relief Type: Eviction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The respondents are ordered to hand over possession of the building.
Evidence:
The respondents 2 to 4/tenants are hereby directed to put the landlord/petitioners in possession of the schedule building under Section 11(4)(iv) of the Act within 30 days from today.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Petitioners are entitled to realize the costs of the petition.
Evidence:
The petitioners are entitled to realize the costs of the petition from the respondents 2 to 4.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Lawyer's Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document serves as a notification to the respondents regarding the eviction proceedings.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Postal receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
These original postal receipts are evidence of delivery of the lawyer's notice to the respondents.
Reference:
Ext.A2 series
Document Type: A/d Card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
These A/D cards further confirm that the notice was received by the respondents.
Reference:
Ext.A3 series
Document Type: Returned Postal envelope
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document indicates that the notice sent to the 2nd respondent was unclaimed.
Reference:
Ext.A4

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Outcome Confidence
75%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases