Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
R C P No.37/2025

Case between Yamuna Chandran et al vs K. B. Hareesh et al regarding eviction under Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act.

Court
RENT CONTROL COURT/ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-II
Judge
Smt. Anjali. P
Order Date
2025-06-19
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Yamuna Chandran and her children are petitioning for eviction of K. B. Hareesh and K. B. Sabeesh from a property that belonged to their deceased husband and father. The petitioners need the property for starting a nursery, which they claim the respondents do not depend on for income.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court allowed the petition for eviction under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, directing the respondents to surrender possession of the property within one month.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Eviction of respondents from the petition schedule shop rooms.
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the petition for eviction under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, directing the respondents to surrender possession of the property within one month.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The petitioners demonstrated a bonafide need for the property and the evidence presented was unchallenged.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The petitioners demonstrated a bonafide need for the property and the evidence presented was unchallenged.
Supporting Evidence
The bonafide need of the petitioners is proved by the unchallenged oral testimony of the PW1.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the rent control petition is allowed under Section 11(3) of Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act. That the respondent is hereby directed to surrender the vacant possession of the petition schedule shop rooms within one month from today.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Yamuna Chandran
Party Age
79
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Seena Rajesh
Party Age
55
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Dayesh Chandran
Party Age
53
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
K. B. Hareesh
Party Age
53
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
K. B. Sabeesh
Party Age
43
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of Lawyer notice sent by petitioner’s Advocate to respondent, Postal acknowledgment card, Postal receipt, Reply lawyer notice.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. K. P. Gangadharan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Eviction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The petition for eviction of the respondent from the petition schedule shop rooms is allowed.
Evidence:
I find that the petitioner is entitled for an order of eviction as prayed for.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The respondent shall pay the costs of the proceedings to the petitioner.
Evidence:
The respondent shall pay the costs of the proceedings to the petitioner.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Copy of Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was used to inform the respondent about the petitioners' claim regarding the eviction.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Postal Acknowledgment Card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document confirms receipt of the lawyer notice by the respondent.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Postal Acknowledgment Card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document confirms receipt of the lawyer notice by the respondent.
Reference:
Ext.A2(a)
Document Type: Postal receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document serves as proof of sending the lawyer notice to the respondent.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Postal receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document serves as proof of sending the lawyer notice to the respondent.
Reference:
Ext.A3(a)
Document Type: Reply Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is the reply from the respondent denying the allegations made by the petitioners.
Reference:
Ext.A4

Case Classification

Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Category
Eviction and Rent Control
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 2 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Yamuna Chandran et al vs K. B. Hareesh et al regarding eviction under Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act.
Case Code Year
Case between Yamuna Chandran et al vs K. B. Hareesh et al regarding eviction under Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act.

Quick Facts

Location
Kozhikode
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 2 Kozhikode
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Sun, 06/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Sun, 08/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between C.Jayaraj Panicker et al vs M.P.Mujeeb Rahman regarding eviction and rent arrears
Rent Control Court/Additional Munsiff-II, Kozhikode
Rent Control Petition Plaintiff Won
Case between Devasya vs V. K.Sasi regarding eviction from shop room
Munsiff-II, Kozhikode
Rent Control Petition Plaintiff Won
Case between Pandikasala Vahija et al vs Musthafa Alungal regarding eviction from shop rooms
Rent Control Court/Munsiff-II, Kozhikode
Rent Control Petition Plaintiff Won
Case between Pandikasala Sabira et al vs Hashim Thangal regarding eviction from shop room
Munsiff-II, Kozhikode
Rent Control Petition Plaintiff Won
Case between Pandikasala Vahija et al vs Musthafa Alungal regarding eviction.
Rent Control Court/Munsiff-II
Rent Control Petition Plaintiff Won