Case Summary
The petitioners, a husband and wife along with the mother of the husband, seek eviction of their tenants from an apartment in Ernakulam due to non-payment of rent and a bona fide need for the apartment. The respondents, who have been tenants since 2021, contest the eviction, citing various claims regarding the maintainability of the petition and their own need.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Eviction of respondents from the petition schedule building.
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Final Judgment
No
The court granted the petitioners' request for eviction, allowing them to regain possession of their apartment. The respondents were ordered to vacate the property within 30 days.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found the petitioner's need for the property to be bona fide and not challenged substantively by the respondents.
The court found the petitioner's need for the property to be bona fide and not challenged substantively by the respondents.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
Thus, on analyzing the above facts and entire evidences available on records, this court is convinced with the bonafide need as projected by the petitioners under section 11(3) of the Act.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the petition is allowed under Section 11(3) of the Act as follows; (i) The respondents are hereby directed to put the petitioners in vacant possession of the petition schedule building within 30 days from today.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Vineeth Mathew
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Serina Elizabeth Jacob
- Party Age
- 44
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Rachel Raju
- Party Age
- 76
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Jayasankar P.R.
- Party Age
- 43
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Aparna Jayasankar
- Party Age
- 40
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 3728/2009, Printout of Email dated 08.04.2024.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Basil Mathew
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Ninan John
- 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
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Anishad P.S.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sreeparthi G.V.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Eviction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Order directing the respondents to vacate the petition schedule building.
Evidence:
The respondents are hereby directed to put the petitioners in vacant possession of the petition schedule building within 30 days from today.
Relief Type:
Costs
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Order for the respondents to pay the costs of the proceedings.
Evidence:
The petitioners are entitled to get the costs of the proceedings from the respondents.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proves ownership of the petition schedule building.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Email
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Serves as evidence of communication requesting the respondents to vacate.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Complaint
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Contains the respondents' objections against the eviction petition.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Case Classification
Case Type
Rent Control 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 Vineeth Mathew et al vs Jayasankar P.R. et al regarding eviction under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act.
Case Code Year
Case between Vineeth Mathew et al vs Jayasankar P.R. et al regarding eviction under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act.