Back
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, M.R.ANITHA, JJ
SIMON K.J. – Appellant
Versus
MANGAMMA @ BREJITH ANDREWS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of eviction petition and tenant's objections. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 6) |
| 2. limits of revisional jurisdiction in eviction matters. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 3. evidence of bona fide need must be established concretely. (Para 14 , 15 , 18) |
| 4. court upholds the findings of the need for eviction. (Para 29 , 34) |
ORDER
M.R.Anitha, J.
This Rent Control Revision petition has been directed against the judgment in R.C.A.No.11 of 2019 on the file of Additional District Judge and Rent Control Appellate Authority, North Paravur, dated 17.12.2019, which arises out of the order dated 6.6.2019 in R.C.P.No.11 of 2011 of the Rent Control Court, North Paravur.
2. This is the second round of litigation before this Court in connection with the aforesaid R.C.P. Revision petitioners are the respondents-tenant in the R.C.P.11 of 2011 filed by the 1st respondent herein-landlord, along with his son, the 2nd respondent herein, seeking eviction of the petition schedule shop room under Sections 11 (3), 11(4)(ii) and 11(4)(v) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (in short 'the Act'), on the ground that the tenant ceased to occupy the petition schedule shop room for more than six mo
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
