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

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
R.C.P. No. 04/2022

Case between V.G.Divakaran vs T.G.Mohanan regarding Rent Control

Court
COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER
Judge
Smt. REEJA R. NAIR.
Order Date
2025-10-08
Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

V.G.Divakaran filed a rent control petition against T.G.Mohanan for eviction due to failure to pay rent and bonafide need for the premises. The respondent denied the allegations, stating financial dependency and that he was not conducting business.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The petition for eviction was allowed as the court found the landlord's need to be bonafide, directing the respondent to vacate the premises within 30 days.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The respondent is hereby directed to put the petitioner in possession of the petition schedule building within 30 days from today.
Case Type
Rent Control
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found the petitioner's need for the building to be genuine and bonafide under Section 11(3) of the Act.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the petition is allowed in part under Section 11(3) of the Act as follows; i. The respondent is hereby directed to put the petitioner in possession of the petition schedule building within 30 days from today.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

V.G.Divakaran (73 years years) Saranam House, Door No.33/2708(Old No.48/313) Elamakkara, Elamakkara P.O, Kochi-682026

Defendants

T.G.Mohanan (60 years years) Alunkal House, Elamakkara, Elamakkara P.O, Kochi-682 026

Reliefs

Relief Type: Eviction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The petitioner is granted eviction under Section 11(3) of the Act.
Evidence:
The petition is allowed in part under Section 11(3) of the Act as follows; The respondent is hereby directed to put the petitioner in possession of the petition schedule building within 30 days from today.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The petitioner is entitled to get the costs of the proceedings from the respondent.
Evidence:
Hence, the petitioner is entitled to get the costs.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Lawyer's Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The document includes a lawyer's notice issued to the respondent regarding the arrears of rent.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Reply Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This is the reply notice from the respondent to the lawyer's notice issued by the petitioner.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Lawyer's Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The document consists of another lawyer's notice issued to the respondent about the claim for arrears and bonafide need.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Reply Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This is a reply notice from the respondent in response to the petitioner's second notice.
Reference:
Ext.A4

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases