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
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Eviction of the respondent from the premises.
Case Type
Eviction Petition
Final Judgment
No
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.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The petitioner provided evidence of rent arrears and a bona fide need for the property.
The petitioner provided evidence of rent arrears and a bona fide need for the property.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The petitioner provided evidence of rent arrears and a bona fide need for the property.
The petitioner provided evidence of rent arrears and a bona fide need for the property.
Supporting Evidence
The unrebutted oral testimony of PW1 and Ext. A1 to A3 established his case as pleaded by him. It shows that the rent is in arrears as claimed by the petitioner. The bonafide need was also projected by the petitioner's son and his wife to start a home appliance business in the petition scheduled building.
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
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- T.K. Hariharan
- Party Age
- 76
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Amalu C.S.
- Party Age
- 38
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Lawyer's notice dated 30.09.2024, Original envelope containing the lawyer's notice issued to the respondent returned as 'unclaimed', Original returned envelope containing the lawyer's notice issued to the respondent as 'addressee refused.'
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Basil Mathew
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sanjana Sara varghese
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Arya A.R.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Ninan John
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Margret Maria Siju
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
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
Case Classification
Case Type
Eviction Petition
Category
Eviction and Rent Control
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
Case between T.K. Hariharan vs Amalu C.S. regarding eviction under the Kerala Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act.
Case Code Year
Case between T.K. Hariharan vs Amalu C.S. regarding eviction under the Kerala Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act.