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

2011 Supreme(Ker) 14

PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, N.K.ALAKRISHNAN
Akbar Ali – Appellant
Versus
U. Narayanankutty – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:V. Chitambaresh (Sr.), Advocate.
For the Respondent: No Appearance.

JUDGMENT :-


Balakrishnan, J.

1. The short point that arises for consideration in these seven Rent Control Revisions is whether the order for joint trial and the consequent order of eviction passed by the learned Rent Controller u/s.11(3) of Act 2/65 which was confirmed in appeal by the learned Appellate Authority suffer from the vice of illegality, irregularity or impropriety warranting invocation of the revisional jurisdiction of this Court under S. 20 of the Act.

2. Eight Rent Control Petitions were filed by the same landlord against different tenants inter alia raising the common ground for eviction under S.11(3) of the Act. All the petition schedule rooms form part of the ground floor of a larger building. The common ground urged by the landlord is that he requires all the petition schedule buildings/rooms for the purpose of conducting a departmental store. It was averred that in order to conduct a departmental store, necessary modifications and alternations will be effected by him after the buildings are got vacated. Against some of the tenants apart from Section 11(3), other grounds like Section 11(4)(iii) and 11(4)(v) were also projected.

3. All the eight Rent Control Petit


























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