PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, M.C.HARI RANI
V. Govindan, Son of Vattu – Appellant
Versus
P. A. Rasheed – Respondent
Pius C. Kuriakose, J.
The landlords are the revision petitioners. They sought for eviction of the respondent-tenant who is conducting business in time keepers of various types by name TimenTune in the schedule building which is situated at a spot which can easily be described as the heart area of Cochin City from the point of our view, the junction where the Mahatma Gandhi Road meets the Rajaji Road. The ground for eviction invoked were Section 11(2) (b) arrears of rent and Section 11(3) bona fide need for own occupation. The R.C.P. was instituted by the revision petitioners relying on the lease deed executed by the respondent in favour of one Narayanan, the brother of the first revision petitioner on 28.7.1989. It was averred that consequent on partition of the common properties amongst the above brother Narayanan, the first petitioner and others, the ownership of the schedule building became allotted towards the share of the first revision petitioner and that the respondent-tenant attorned to the revision petitioners and was paying the rent directly to the revision petitioners.
2. The respondent filed detailed statements of objections. He contended through the written
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.