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

2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 9365

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
,
HAJIRMALAYIL AMMAD – Appellant
Versus
JANAKI PK – Respondent


O R D E R

Ajithkumar, J.

The petitioner is the tenant. The respondents-landladies filed R.C.P.No.47 of 2008 before the Rent Control Court (Munsiff), Vatakara seeking eviction of the petitioner under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965. As per order dated 29.02.2020, the Rent Control Court ordered eviction. The petitioner filed an appeal under Section 18(1)(b) of the Act before the Rent Control Appellate Authority (Additional District Judge), Vatakara. The appeal was dismissed. The petitioner therefore filed this revision under Section 20 of the Act.

2. When this matter came up for admission today, we heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

3. The respondents sought eviction of the petitioner from the petition schedule shop room on the ground of bona fide need for own occupation stating that the 2nd respondent wants to start a tailoring shop cum outlet for sale of churidar materials.

4. The tenant filed a counter statement contending that the need urged by the respondent was not bona fide. There was no need or necessity for the 2nd respondent to conduct a tailoring shop or a business. The petitioner has been depending for his livelihoo

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