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

1983 Supreme(Ker) 190

BALAKRISHNA MENON
MUHAMMED – Appellant
Versus
ABDUL RAHIMAN – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. This revision at the instance of the Respondents-tenants is against the concurrent decision of the courts below, for their eviction under S.11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Act.

2. Two shop rooms in a building belonging to the petitioner-landlord were let to the respondents-tenants for conducting a grocery shop. The landlord is in possession of two rooms and a side room in the same building. Eviction was ordered by the courts below on the finding that the landlord bona fide requires the two rooms in question for the purpose of his residence as well as to carry on a trade for his living.

3. Even though the finding of bona fide need for own occupation of the landlord is challenged in this revision, nothing is brought out before me to interfere with the concurrent finding of fact. The courts below have accepted the evidence adduced on behalf of the landlord that he is presently residing in a house belonging to his step mother, he has no right of residence in the said house, there are other persons residing with the step mother and there is no sufficient space for the occupation of the landlord and his family.








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