Case Summary
Shamsudheen filed a petition for eviction against the heirs of his deceased tenant, Lakshmanan, citing non-payment of rent and cessation of business operations in the rented premises. The respondents argue they have been paying rent and are using the property for their business.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The respondents are directed to give vacant possession of the petition schedule building to the petitioner within three months.
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the petition for eviction based on the evidence provided by the petitioner regarding non-payment of rent and cessation of business activities by the respondents.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The petitioner proved his bona fide need for the premises for his business.
The petitioner proved his bona fide need for the premises for his business.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
I am satisfied that the bona fide need put forward by the petitioner is genuine.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the petition is allowed under S. 11(3), S. 11 (2) (b) and 11 (4) (v) 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. 20/843 of Tirur Municipality to the petitioner within three months from today.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Shamsudheen
- Party Age
- 58
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sarada
- Party Age
- 69
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Pramod
- Party Age
- 50
- Relation
- Son
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Praveen
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- Son
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Prajeesh
- Party Age
- 43
- Relation
- Son
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Praseeda
- Party Age
- 39
- Relation
- Daughter
Plaintiffs Documents
Photocopy of Registered Lawyer notices, Certified copy of Partition deed
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. M.A.Ismail
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.P.P.Shiyas
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri.V.Chandrasekharan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri.K.Vipin
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Eviction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Eviction of the respondents from the petition schedule building.
Evidence:
The petitioner is entitled to get an order under S. 11(3), 11 (2) (b) and 11 (4) (v) of the Kerala Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act 1965.
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Order directing the respondents to vacate the building.
Evidence:
The respondents are directed to give vacant possession of the petition schedule building bearing No. 20/843 of Tirur Municipality to the petitioner within three months from today.
Relief Type:
Cost
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Petitioner entitled to realize costs of the proceedings from respondents.
Evidence:
The petitioner is entitled to realise the costs of the petition from the respondents.
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Partly Granted
Description:
Condition for evicting the respondents based on payment of arrears.
Evidence:
An order under S. 11 (2) (b) shall be vacated if the respondent deposit the arrears of rent with interest and costs of the proceedings, within one month from today.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Lawyer Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was used to show the demand for surrendering vacant possession of the building.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Lawyer Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was also used to demonstrate the demand for surrendering the building.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Lawyer Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was part of the plaintiff's evidence regarding the attempts to notify the respondents.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Lawyer Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This reply notice was relevant to understand the respondents' claims against the eviction.
Reference:
Ext.A11
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was used to establish ownership and claims over the property.
Reference:
Ext.A12
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This report verified the status of the building's occupancy at the time of inspection.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This plan provided visual evidence related to the building's layout.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This report corroborated the condition and usage of the building at a later date.
Reference:
Ext.C3
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This plan represented the proposed modifications needed for the business.
Reference:
Ext.C4
Document Type:
Oral Evidence
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Oral testimony from the petitioner regarding the need for the building was also considered.
Reference:
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
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
Case between Shamsudheen vs Sarada et al regarding eviction of tenants
Case Code Year
Case between Shamsudheen vs Sarada et al regarding eviction of tenants