Case Summary
Rajesh Radhakrishnan Kartha filed a rent control petition seeking eviction of the respondents under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act. The parties reached a compromise, agreeing on the terms of eviction and payment of arrears.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Respondents directed to put the petitioner in possession of the petition schedule building.
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the rent control petition based on a joint compromise between the parties. The respondents are required to vacate the petition schedule property by a specified date.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The parties voluntarily entered into a lawful compromise.
The parties voluntarily entered into a lawful compromise.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The parties voluntarily entered into a lawful compromise.
The parties voluntarily entered into a lawful compromise.
Supporting Evidence
The court is convinced that the parties have entered into the compromise voluntarily. The compromise in writing is signed by the parties.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the rent control petition is allowed under Section 11(2)(b) of the Act as follows: The respondent is hereby directed to put the petitioner in possession of the petition schedule building on or before 30.04.2025, failing which the petitioner is at liberty to execute it through the process of court.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Rajesh Radhakrishnan Kartha
- Party Age
- 51
- Relation
- S/o.
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- M/s. Cochin Law Chambers
- Relation
- Rep. by
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- P.A.Davis
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Koshy George
- Relation
- Advocate
Plaintiffs Documents
Cheque dated 20.02.2025 bearing No-113185 for Rs.52000/-.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Dinesh R. Shenoy
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Joseph George
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Soumya T.S.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- M.K. Ravi
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Silesh S. Prabhu
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Rohit Premanandan Shenoy
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- K.M. Jamaludheen
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Latha Prabhakaran
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The respondent is directed to put the petitioner in possession of the petition schedule building.
Evidence:
In the result, the rent control petition is allowed under Section 11(2)(b) of the Act as follows: 1. The respondent is hereby directed to put the petitioner in possession of the petition schedule building on or before 30.04.2025, failing which the petitioner is at liberty to execute it through the process of court.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Category
Eviction and Rent Control
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Eviction
Case Code
Case between Rajesh Radhakrishnan Kartha vs M/s. Cochin Law Chambers et al regarding eviction under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act.
Case Code Year
Case between Rajesh Radhakrishnan Kartha vs M/s. Cochin Law Chambers et al regarding eviction under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act.
Case Flags
Cheque-Related Case
Out-of-Court Settlement
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque issued towards legally enforceable debt