Case Summary
The plaintiffs, consisting of Sulaiman, Noorjahan, Kamarubanu, Jamshiya, and Rukhiya, filed a suit against defendants Aboobacker, Haseena, and Rahmath seeking eviction. The court decreed the suit based on a compromise between the parties.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Eviction based on terms of compromise
Case Type
Eviction Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit for eviction was decreed based on a lawful compromise between the parties.
Why Plaintiff Won:
Terms of the compromise were fulfilled by the defendants, leading to a lawful decree.
Terms of the compromise were fulfilled by the defendants, leading to a lawful decree.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
Not available
Judgment Evidence:
Compromise IA 2011/17 filed by the parties. The terms of the compromise are as follows; 1) The first defendant agreed to give the vacant possession of plaint schedule room to the plaintiff. As a condition to the said term the plaintiff agreed to pay an amount of Rs.20,000/- to the first defendant on 31-8-2017. 2. Within 15 days of the payment of said amount the first defendant shall remove the iron ovens affixed as reported in commission report dated 27-7-2017, MNOP, without causing any damage to the other articles in the plaint schedule room. 3. On fulfillment of the above said terms, the first defendant shall hand over the key of the plaint schedule room to the plaintiff. 4. Matter is settled between the parties in the above said terms. Since the terms of compromise is lawful, the suit is decreed as per the terms of the compromise. Compromise IA 2011/17 shall form part of the decree.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sulaiman
- Party Age
- 60
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Noorjahan
- Party Age
- 33
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Kamarubanu
- Party Age
- 28
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Jamshiya
- Party Age
- 24
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Rukhiya
- Party Age
- 57
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Aboobacker
- Party Age
- 55
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Haseena
- Party Age
- 26
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Rahmath
- Party Age
- 27
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Not mentioned
Defendants Documents
Not mentioned
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Dinesh Pookkayil
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri.M.A.Ismail
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Eviction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Eviction decree based on compromise terms
Evidence:
Compromise IA 2011/17 filed by the parties. The terms of the compromise are as follows; 1) The first defendant agreed to give the vacant possession of plaint schedule room to the plaintiff. As a condition to the said term the plaintiff agreed to pay an amount of Rs.20,000/- to the first defendant on 31-8-2017. 2. Within 15 days of the payment of said amount the first defendant shall remove the iron ovens affixed as reported in commission report dated 27-7-2017, MNOP, without causing any damage to the other articles in the plaint schedule room. 3. On fulfillment of the above said terms, the first defendant shall hand over the key of the plaint schedule room to the plaintiff. 4. Matter is settled between the parties in the above said terms. Since the terms of compromise is lawful, the suit is decreed as per the terms of the compromise. Compromise IA 2011/17 shall form part of the decree.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Eviction Suit
Category
Eviction and Rent Control
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Eviction Suit
Case Code
Case between Sulaiman et al vs Aboobacker et al regarding eviction
Case Code Year
Case between Sulaiman et al vs Aboobacker et al regarding eviction