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

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
R.C.P. No. 47/2025

Case between T.K. Hariharan vs Amalu C.S. regarding eviction under the Kerala Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act.

Court
THE COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER
Judge
SMT. REEJA R. NAIR
Order Date
2025-07-16
Duration
approximately-2 years 1 month

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The petitioner, T.K. Hariharan, seeks eviction of the respondent, Amalu C.S., from a commercial property due to arrears in rent and a bona fide need for the premises. The petitioner has established that the respondent has failed to pay the owed rent and requires the property for his son's business.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court granted the petition for eviction, ordering the respondent to vacate the property within 30 days. The court recognized the petitioner's bona fide need for the premises for his son's business.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Eviction of the respondent from the premises.
Case Type
Eviction Petition
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The petitioner provided evidence of rent arrears and a bona fide need for the property.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, The petition is allowed u/s 11(2)(b) and 11(3) of the Act with costs as follows:- The respondent/tenant is directed to put the landlord/ petitioner in possession of the petition schedule building within 30 days from today.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

T.K. Hariharan (76 years years) Thoppil House, Eroor P.O., Thripunithura.

Defendants

Amalu C.S. (38 years years) 1/662, first floor, K.K. Towers, Oppo. Kappattikkavu bus stop, Eroor South, Thripunithura, Pin-682 306.

Reliefs

Relief Type: Eviction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The respondent is directed to put the landlord/petitioner in possession of the petition schedule building within 30 days.
Evidence:
The petition is allowed u/s 11(2)(b) and 11(3) of the Act.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The petitioner is entitled to get the costs of the petition from the respondent.
Evidence:
The petitioner is entitled to get the costs of the petition from the respondent.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Lawyer's Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is a copy of the lawyer's notice sent to the respondent demanding payment of rent arrears and vacate the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Envelope containing lawyer's notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is the original envelope containing the lawyer's notice issued to the respondent at the petition schedule building address, which was returned as 'unclaimed'.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Returned envelope containing lawyer's notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is the original returned envelope containing the lawyer's notice issued to the respondent at her residential address, which was returned as 'addressee refused'.
Reference:
Ext.A3

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Thu, 06/15/2023 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases