Case Summary
The petitioner, Sareena, seeks to evict the respondent, K.T.Abdu Raheem, from a shop room rented out to him, claiming bonafide need for her husband's business. The respondent counters that he has paid due rent and has no need to vacate as he is dependent on the premises for livelihood.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The respondent is directed to put the petitioner in possession of the petition schedule shop room within two months.
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the eviction petition, stating that the petitioner has bona fide need for the scheduled premises for her husband's business.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The petitioner established a bona fide need for the premises based on credible evidence.
The petitioner established a bona fide need for the premises based on credible evidence.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The petitioner established a bona fide need for the premises based on credible evidence.
The petitioner established a bona fide need for the premises based on credible evidence.
Supporting Evidence
The need projected by PW is a bona fide one and not a mere desire.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, RCP is allowed under Section 11(3) of KBLR Act as follows: 1) The respondent is hereby directed to put the petitioner in possession of the petition schedule shop room within a period of two months from today, failing which the petitioners can execute this order by due process of the Court.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Chakkalathop Puthiya Purayil Sareena
- Party Age
- 68
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- K.T.Abdu Raheem
- Party Age
- 64
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Registered lawyer notice with cheque sent by Advocate Simon Chacko to Sareena, Reply of lawyer notice sent by Advocate Muhammed Iqubal to Advocate Simon Chacko, Postal receipt.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.K.M.Muhammed Iqubal
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Smt.Noorjahan.C.V
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Smt.Dilshana M.K
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Simon Chacko
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Eviction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Petitioner is entitled for an order of eviction under section 11(3) of KBLR Act.
Evidence:
Hence I find that the petitioner is entitled for an order of eviction under section 11(3) of KBLR Act as prayed for.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Lawyer Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was sent to demand arrears of rent.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Reply of Lawyer Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is the reply to the lawyer notice sent by the respondent.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Case Classification
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Category
Eviction and Rent Control
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
Case between Chakkalathop Puthiya Purayil Sareena vs K.T.Abdu Raheem regarding eviction of scheduled premises under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings Lease and Rent Control Act 1965.
Case Code Year
Case between Chakkalathop Puthiya Purayil Sareena vs K.T.Abdu Raheem regarding eviction of scheduled premises under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings Lease and Rent Control Act 1965.
Case Flags
Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque issued towards legally enforceable debt