SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(Ker) 20

K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Puthiyedath Pakran – Appellant
Versus
Rayaroth Kunhiraman Nambiar – Respondent


Judgment :-

Pius C. Kuriakose, J.

The present owner of the building, 2nd petitioner before the Rent Control Court and the other legal heirs of his father, 1st petitioner before the Rent Control Court are the revision petitioners. The parties will be referred to as landlord and tenant or by their ranks before the Rent Control Court. The schedule building is one of the two rooms in the ground floor of a double storeyed building situated on the principal junction of Perambra, a small town in Malabar. The petitioners sought eviction before the Rent Control Court invoking the grounds of arrears of rent [Section 11(2)(b)]. User of building in a manner as to reduce its value and utility [Section 11(4)(ii)], the tenant putting up or acquiring possession of other buildings [11(4)(iii)], cessation of occupation [Section 11(4)(v) and additional accommodation [Section 11(8)] of the Rent Control Act.

2. The Rent Control Court did not grant relief to the petitioner on any of the grounds. That Court even held the rent control petition to be not maintainable in law due to the reason that the gift deed relied on by the 2nd petitioner, the de facto claimant for the ground under Section 11(8) contained





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top