Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
R.C.P.No. 26/2019

Case between M. Abubacker vs V.M. Mohan regarding fixation of rent

Court
COURT OF RENT CONTROL
Judge
Smt.Salini.B.
Order Date
2025-07-25
Duration
approximately-2 years 9 months
Case Code No.
26
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

M. Abubacker is the petitioner seeking to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to investigate a rent-related petition. V.M. Mohan, the counter petitioner, argues that the case is being prolonged and the court should dismiss the petition.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court dismissed the petition filed by M. Abubacker, stating it was not maintainable and the counter petitioner was not cooperating. No costs were ordered.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the petition filed by M. Abubacker, stating it was not maintainable and the counter petitioner was not cooperating. No costs were ordered.
Key Reasoning:
The petition was found to be prolonging the case and not maintainable.
Why Defendant Won:
The petition was found to be prolonging the case and not maintainable.
Supporting Evidence
Considering the rival contentions raised by both sides, I am of the view that for proving of photographs produced by the defendant, the burden is upon the produced it. The petition is not liable to be allowed.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
M. Abubacker
Party Age
86
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
V.M. Mohan
Party Age
60
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Rajaprathap. S.J
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. S. Laila
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
The petition to appoint an Advocate Commissioner was dismissed.
Evidence:
Considering the rival contentions raised by both sides, I am of the view that for proving of photographs produced by the defendant, the burden is upon the produced it.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
The report prepared by the Advocate Commissioner was accepted in evidence regarding the matters sought to be ascertained.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Photographs
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
The photographs produced by the defendant were to ascertain the petition schedule building.
Reference:
Ext.B1 series

Case Classification

Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
R.C.P.NO.
Case Code Year
2019

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Thu, 09/29/2022 - 12:00
Case Closed
From
Tue, 07/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Thu, 07/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between B.Vijayan vs Shabnam Aslam regarding petition dismissal
IN THE COURT OF RENT CONTROL
Rent Control Petition Defendant Won
Case between Nisha vs P.Ramesan regarding Rent Control Petition
Rent Control Court
Rent Control Petition Defendant Won
Case between Noorul Islamic Educational Trust(NIET) vs M/s Acumen Global Private Limited et al regarding a petition.
Rent Control Court
Rent Control Petition Defendant Won
Case between Barbara Thomas vs Sonia Benny regarding Rent Control Petition
Rent Control Court
Rent Control Petition Defendant Won
Case between Ashraf Ali vs Badhusha regarding rent control petition
COURT OF RENT CONTROL
Rent Control Petition Defendant Won