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

2009 Supreme(Ker) 46

PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, M.C.HARI RANI
Jain Abraham, Aged 41, S/O. Abraham – Appellant
Versus
BEST BUY TV & Home Appliances – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:For the Petitioner:V. Rajendran (PERUMBAVOOR), Advocate.

Judgment :

Pius C. Kuriakose, J.

This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is filed by the landlord, who is the petitioner in

R.C.P. No.16/2008, on the files of the Rent Control Court, Ernakulam. The grievance voiced by the petitioner is that the Principal Munsiff Court, Ernakulam, which is presently holding charge of the Rent Control Court, is not passing final orders on Exts.P5 and P6, which are applications filed by him under Sections 12(1) and 12(2) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease And Rent Control) Act 1965 respectively. On notice being served on the respondent by special messenger, Sri.K.R.Vinod, Advocate has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent.

2. We have heard the submissions of Sri. V. Rajendran, (Perumbavoor) learned counsel for the petitioner and also those of Sri. K.R. Vinod, learned counsel for the respondent. Sri. Vinod submitted that going by the counter affidavit, which the respondent had filed to the first application under Section 12 filed by the petitioner, the respondent has admitted that the rent is in default only from June, 2008. The petitioner, the learned counsel would submit, is ready and willing to pay the rent arrears so admitted











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