Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
R C P No.49/2021

Case between P. Ahamed Saidu Muhammed et al vs P. Koyakutty et al regarding eviction of respondents from petition schedule property

Court
RENT CONTROL COURT/ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-II
Judge
Smt. Meera John.K
Order Date
2025-01-23
Duration
approximately-7 years 6 months
Case Closed
Thu, 01/23/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The case involves petitioners P. Ahamed Saidu Muhammed and his legal heirs seeking eviction of respondents P. Koyakutty and Hela Tex & Tops from a property due to non-payment of rent and unauthorized subleasing. The petitioners contend that the respondents have failed to comply with their requests for vacating the property since July 2017.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court allowed the petition for eviction of the respondents from the property. The respondents are ordered to surrender vacant possession within one month and pay the costs of the petition.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Eviction of the respondents from the property and costs of the petition.
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the petition for eviction of the respondents from the property. The respondents are ordered to surrender vacant possession within one month and pay the costs of the petition.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The petitioners produced unchallenged evidence supporting their claim for eviction.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The petitioners produced unchallenged evidence supporting their claim for eviction.
Supporting Evidence
The evidence of PW1 and the documents produced by him stands unchallenged. As such, I find that the petitioners are entitled for an order of eviction as prayed for.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the petition is allowed under Section 11(2)(b), 11(4)(i), 11(4)(iii) of Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act as follows: 1) The respondents shall surrender the vacant possession of the petition schedule shop room within one month from today, failing which the petitioners can get the order executed through the procedure known to law.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
P. Ahamed Saidu Muhammed
Party Age
71
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Anwar Ahamed Saidu.P
Party Age
42
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Ansila Khadeeja.P
Party Age
41
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Anjith Ahammed Saidu.P
Party Age
45
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
P. Koyakutty
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Hela Tex & Tops
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of R.C.P 35/2013, Copy of Plaintiff in OS 283/2016, Copy of Lawyer notice.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.K.M.Musthafa
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
V.G.Neena
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Advocate Anoop.A
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Eviction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The respondents shall surrender the vacant possession of the petition schedule shop room.
Evidence:
I find that the petitioners are entitled for an order of eviction as prayed for.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The respondents shall pay the costs of the petition to the petitioners.
Evidence:
The respondents shall pay the costs of the petition to the petitioners.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Copy of R.C.P 35/2013 filed before Munsiff Court -II (A) Kozhikode
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was presented to establish prior legal action against the respondent.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Copy of Plaintiff in OS 283/2016 filed before Munsiff Court -II (A) Kozhikode
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was presented to provide context regarding previous legal proceedings.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Copy of Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was used to demonstrate that a legal notice was sent to the respondents.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Unclaimed order
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was referenced as part of the legal proceedings though details remain unclear.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Unclaimed order
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was also referenced in connection with the legal matter.
Reference:
Ext.A5

Case Classification

Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Category
Eviction and Rent Control
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 2 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
Case between P. Ahamed Saidu Muhammed et al vs P. Koyakutty et al regarding eviction of respondents from petition schedule property
Case Code Year
Case between P. Ahamed Saidu Muhammed et al vs P. Koyakutty et al regarding eviction of respondents from petition schedule property

Quick Facts

Location
Kozhikode
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 2 Kozhikode
Case Filed
Sat, 07/01/2017 - 12:00
Case Closed
Thu, 01/23/2025 - 12:00
From
Wed, 01/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 02/28/2025 - 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