Case Summary
Ummu Habeeba, the petitioner, seeks eviction of the respondents from a shop room she owns, claiming a bona fide need for her son to start a catering business. The respondents contend that the eviction is unwarranted as they depend on the income from the shop for their livelihood.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The respondents No. 2 to 7 are directed to give vacant possession of the petition schedule shop room bearing No. X/433 of Tirur Municipality to the petitioner within three months.
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The petitioner proved that her need for the shop room was genuine and the respondents could not adequately demonstrate their dependency on the shop for livelihood.
The petitioner proved that her need for the shop room was genuine and the respondents could not adequately demonstrate their dependency on the shop for livelihood.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the petition is allowed under S. 11(3) of the Kerala Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act as follows: I. The respondents No. 2 to 7 are directed to give vacant possession of the petition schedule shop room bearing No. X/433 of Tirur Municipality to the petitioner within three months from today.
Parties Involved
Plaintiffs
Ummu Habeeba (Age not specified years)
Tharammal, Tirur Amsom, Kott Desom, Tirur Taluk.
Defendants
Chandrakath Kunhimma (Age not specified years)
W/o Kunnathuparambil Muhammed, Tirur Amsom, and Post, Kot Desom, Tirur Taluk.
Kunnath Parambil Shamsu (50 years years)
S/o. K.P. Muhammed @ Kerala Muhammed.
K.P. Thajudheen (48 years years)
S/o. K.P. Muhammed @ Kerala Muhammed.
K.P. Jaleel (35 years years)
S/o. K.P. Muhammed @ Kerala Muhammed.
K.P. Kunhikkoya (43 years years)
S/o. K.P. Muhammed @ Kerala Muhammed.
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Eviction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The petitioner is entitled to eviction of the respondents from the shop room for bona fide needs.
Evidence:
I am satisfied that the petitioner has successfully proved that she bona fide require the shop room for the proposed business of her son.
Relief Type:
Cost
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The petitioner is entitled to realize the cost of the proceedings from the respondents.
Evidence:
So the petitioner is entitled to realise the cost of the proceedings from respondents.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Rent Agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The document establishes the rental terms between the petitioner and the original respondent.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Copy of Registered Lawyer Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This notice was issued to the respondent to demand the surrender of the rental premises.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Reply Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The document details the respondent's counterarguments in response to the petitioner's notice.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Mark List
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document validates the petitioner's son's qualifications to start a catering business.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Copy of judgment
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This judgment pertains to a prior rent control case involving the same shop room.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Licence
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The document shows the licensing details connected to the business previously conducted in the shop.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Certified copy of Statement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This statement provides insights into a related enforcement proceeding.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Account Statement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document indicates financial transactions related to the petitioner's business.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This report was submitted as part of the court's examination of the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This plan illustrates the layout of the property relevant to the case.
Reference:
Ext.C2