Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. NATARAJAN, J
JISMEY GEORGE – Appellant
Versus
THOMAS GEORGE – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners challenge trial court's order for rent deposit. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. dispute regarding landlord-tenant relationship influences rent obligations. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court affirms necessity of rent deposit pending ownership determination. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. legal precedents support tenant obligations to deposit rent. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. court's dismissal of petitions reinforces monetary obligations of tenants. (Para 15 , 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT
These original petitions have been filed by the petitioners, challenging the order passed by the Munsiff Court, Erattupetta, in I.A No.4/2024 in O.S.Nos.100/2024 & 99/2024 dated 23.01.2025, wherein the petitioners were directed to deposit the arrears of rent, failing which the defence of the petitioners were ordered to be struck off.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and for the respondent.
3. The case of the petitioners in both cases is that the respondent filed two suits against the petitioner as O.S No.99/2024 and 100/2024 seeking eviction from the plaint schedule premises consisting of three rooms, alleging that the parties had entered into a lease agreement dated 08.03.2022. The tenant was p
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
