Case Summary
The petitioners, who are the landlords, seek eviction of the respondents, the tenants, from a shop room they occupy for a tailoring business due to non-payment of rent and a genuine need for the space for a studio. The respondents deny the allegations of rent arrears and contest the eviction.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Eviction of the respondents from the petition schedule building within 30 days
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the eviction petition in part and directed the respondents to vacate the petition schedule building within 30 days, subject to costs.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The petitioners demonstrated a genuine need for the premises and established that the respondents were chronic defaulters in rent payment.
The petitioners demonstrated a genuine need for the premises and established that the respondents were chronic defaulters in rent payment.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The petitioners specifically pleaded their requirement of bona fide need of additional accommodation to start an office space for the third petitioner utilizing the petition schedule room.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the petition is allowed in part under sections 11(2)(b) and 11(8) of the Act as follows; (i) The respondents are hereby directed to put the petitioners in possession of the petition schedule building within 30 days from today.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Salam
- Party Age
- 52
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Saly
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sakeer
- Party Age
- 44
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sameer
- Party Age
- 39
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mr. Manoj S.
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mrs. Neethu Sudharsanan
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of lawyer's notice dated 24.04.2018, Original postal receipt, Original acknowledgment card, Reply notice dated 16.05.2018
Defendants Documents
Rejected exhibits B1 to B3
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Joby Jacob Pulickekudy
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Anil George
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sumeesh K.S.
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Ancy T.
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Fathima Sulfath N.B.
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Dinic C. Coycara
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- K.G. Cleetus
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Eviction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The petitioners were granted eviction of the respondents from the petition schedule room based on the genuine need of the petitioners.
Evidence:
The court found that the need of the petitioners for additional accommodation to start an office space was genuine.
Relief Type:
Costs
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The petitioners were granted the costs of the proceedings from the respondents.
Evidence:
The costs shall follow the event, and thus, the petitioners are entitled to get the costs.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Lawyer Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This notice was issued to inform the respondents of the petitioners' need for vacant possession and to demand payment of arrears.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Postal receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This is the original postal receipt evidencing the sending of the lawyer's notice.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Acknowledgment card
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This card is the original acknowledgment of receipt for the lawyer's notice sent to the respondents.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Reply Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This is the reply notice dated 16.05.2018, which was served in response to the lawyer's notice.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This report relates to the commission conducted in IA No.8848/2019.
Reference:
Ext.C1 series
Document Type:
Additional Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This report is from the additional commission in IA No.8848/2019.
Reference:
Ext.C2 series
Document Type:
Photograph
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Despite being marked, this exhibit was rejected due to lack of proper certification.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Photograph
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This exhibit was marked but rejected due to lack of proper certification.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Statement of Account
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This was another document marked but rejected due to lack of proper certification.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Statement of Account
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
This statement covers the account for the period from 27.04.2018 to 31.10.2025.
Reference:
Ext.X1 series
Case Classification
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Category
Eviction and Rent Control
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Salam et al vs Mr. Manoj S. et al regarding eviction of tenants
Case Code Year
Case between Salam et al vs Mr. Manoj S. et al regarding eviction of tenants
Case Flags
Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque Dishonour