Case Summary
The case involves a petitioner, Shajan.A, and a counter petitioner, Naufal.T, concerning issues related to rent control. They have reached a compromise agreement that the court has approved.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Case Type
Rent Control
Final Judgment
No
The court approved the compromise agreement submitted by both parties, effectively resolving the petition.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The compromise agreement was found to be lawful.
The compromise agreement was found to be lawful.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The compromise agreement was found to be lawful.
The compromise agreement was found to be lawful.
Supporting Evidence
Compromise petition as IA 3/25 is allowed as terms seems lawful.
Judgment Evidence:
Hence petition is decreed in terms of compromise agreement.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Shajan.A
- Party Age
- 54
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Naufal.T
- Party Age
- 47
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Sreekuttan.R.C
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Ganesh Kumar.U.S
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Petition decreed in terms of compromise agreement.
Evidence:
Therefore, petition is decreed in terms of compromise agreement.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Rent Control
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
R.C.P.NO.
Case Code Year
2024