Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
RENT CONTROL PETITION No. 119/2019

Case between Ponmanichintakath Sulaikha vs O. Reneesh regarding eviction from shop room

Court
RENT CONTROL COURT/ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF - I
Judge
Smt. Shabeena M.
Order Date
2025-03-22
Duration
approximately-5 years 6 months
Case Closed
Sat, 03/22/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The petitioner, Ponmanichintakath Sulaikha, seeks eviction of the respondent, O. Reneesh, from a shop room, claiming a need for the space for her husband to start a business. The respondent contends that he has been conducting his tailoring business there since 2001 and that the eviction is motivated by malafide intentions.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The petition for eviction was granted, allowing the petitioner to take possession of the shop room based on the genuine need asserted by the petitioner and the failure of the respondent to establish his claims against eviction.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Respondent to surrender vacant possession within one month
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Final Judgment
No
The petition for eviction was granted, allowing the petitioner to take possession of the shop room based on the genuine need asserted by the petitioner and the failure of the respondent to establish his claims against eviction.
Why Plaintiff Won:
Petitioner's genuine need for the premises was established, supported by credible evidence.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
It is clear from the evidence tendered by both the parties that the need projected by the petitioner is a genuine one.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the petition is allowed Under Sec. 11(3) of the Act and the following order is passed. 1. The respondent shall surrender the vacant possession of the petition schedule room within one month from today, failing which the petitioner can get the order executed through the process of law.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Ponmanichintakath Sulaikha
Party Age
66
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
S.V. Abdul Nazar
Party Age
58
Relation
Represented by
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
O. Reneesh
Party Age
50
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of lawyer notice sent by Adv. K. Lakshmi to Reneesh, Postal receipt, Reply to RTI application issued by State PIO & Health supervisor Calicut Corporation to Sulekha Easakoya.
Defendants Documents
Copy of agreement entered into between Imbichiamina and Renish.

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. M. Raghukumar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. K. Rajan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Eviction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Petitioner sought eviction of respondent from the shop room.
Evidence:
In view of my findings on points No. 1 to 3, the petition is liable to be allowed Under Sec. 11(3) of the Act.
Relief Type: Cost
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Petitioner sought costs associated with the petition.
Evidence:
As such, the costs of the petition shall follow the event.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Lawyer notice sent by the petitioner to the respondent requesting to vacate the shop room.
Reference:
Ext.A1(Series)
Document Type: Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Reply notice issued by the respondent denying the allegations made by the petitioner.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: RTI application
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
RTI application sent by the petitioner to obtain information regarding shop rooms.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: RTI Acknowledgment
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Acknowledgment receipt issued by Kozhikode Corporation for RTI application.
Reference:
Ext.A3(a)
Document Type: RTI Reply
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Reply to the RTI application concerning availability of shop rooms.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Appellate Order
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of appellate order relevant to the petition.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Agreement
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of agreement entered into between the prior owner and the respondent.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Oral Evidence
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
Oral evidence provided by witnesses during the hearing.
Reference:

Case Classification

Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Category
Eviction and Rent Control
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Bonafide requirement
Case Code
Case between Ponmanichintakath Sulaikha vs O. Reneesh regarding eviction from shop room
Case Code Year
Case between Ponmanichintakath Sulaikha vs O. Reneesh regarding eviction from shop room

Quick Facts

Location
Kozhikode
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Case Filed
Fri, 03/22/2019 - 12:00
Case Closed
Sat, 03/22/2025 - 12:00
From
Sat, 02/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Mon, 03/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Mr.Ferose VP vs Mr.Waseem Thondikodan regarding eviction
RENT CONTROL COURT/PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF - I, KOZHIKODE
Rent Control Petition Plaintiff Won
Case between Suresh Kumar et al vs K.T. Sasidharan regarding rent control eviction
Rent Control Court/Additional Munsiff - I
Rent Control Petition Plaintiff Won
Case between K. Jubairiya et al vs Valiyaveetu Parambil Hamsakoya regarding eviction from leased shop room
RENT CONTROL COURT/ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF - I
Rent Control Petition Plaintiff Won
Case between Shoukkathali et al vs Smt.Sumathi regarding eviction under Rent Control Act
RENT CONTROL COURT/PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF - I
Rent Control Petition Plaintiff Won
Case between O.K.Lasitha vs Janakiyamma.P.P regarding eviction under KBLR Act
RENT CONTROL COURT/PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF - I
Rent Control Petition Plaintiff Won