Case Summary
Four petitioners seek eviction of the respondent due to non-payment of license fee and need to start a Mini Super Market in the property for livelihood.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Eviction within one month
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Final Judgment
No
Eviction granted to the petitioners as respondent failed to pay rent and obstructed proposed business plan of petitioners.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The respondent failed to pay rent and obstructed the petitioners' plan to start a business, justifying eviction.
The respondent failed to pay rent and obstructed the petitioners' plan to start a business, justifying eviction.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The respondent failed to pay rent and obstructed the petitioners' plan to start a business, justifying eviction.
The respondent failed to pay rent and obstructed the petitioners' plan to start a business, justifying eviction.
Supporting Evidence
The respondent failed to pay rent and obstructed the petitioners' plan to start a business, justifying eviction.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the petition is allowed under section 11(3) and 11(4)(ii) of the Kerala Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act 1965 as follows: a) The respondent is directed to put the petitioner in vacant possession of the petition schedule property within one month from today. b) The petitioner is entitled to realise the cost of the petition from the respondent.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Fathima
- Party Age
- 51
- Relation
- W/o Moideen
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Muhammed Afeekh
- Party Age
- 33
- Relation
- S/o Moideen
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Ashikh
- Party Age
- 21
- Relation
- S/o Moideen
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Hamna
- Party Age
- 16
- Relation
- D/o Moideen
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Hamza
- Party Age
- 41
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of lawyer notice, Acknowledgment card, Reply Notice, Certified copy of Order, Commission report, Commission plan
Defendants Documents
Not available
Advocates
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Eviction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Directed the respondent to vacate the property within one month
Evidence:
In the result, the petition is allowed under section 11(3) and 11(4)(ii) of the Kerala Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act 1965 as follows: a) The respondent is directed to put the petitioner in vacant possession of the petition schedule property within one month from today. b) The petitioner is entitled to realise the cost of the petition from the respondent.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Copy of Lawyer Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Notice sent to the respondent revoking license due to non-payment
Reference:
A1
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Report showing damages to property by respondent
Reference:
A5(a)
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Plan illustrating damages to property
Reference:
A5(b)
Case Classification
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Category
Eviction and Rent Control
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Fathima et al vs Hamza regarding eviction
Case Code Year
Case between Fathima et al vs Hamza regarding eviction