Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Soumen Sen, CJ, Syam Kumar V.M., J
JAGAJYOTHIMANI – Appellant
Versus
POTTACHILAKATH FATHIMA – Respondent
RCREV. NO. 274 OF 2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. request for time to vacate premises. (Para 1) |
| 2. court confirms no interference with findings. (Para 2) |
| 3. revision petition is dismissed. (Para 3) |
ORDER Dated this the 30th day of January, 2026 Soumen Sen, C.J.
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the revision petitioner has very fairly submitted that having regard to the concurrent finding of fact, which does not appear to be perverse, the revision petition may be disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Executing Court seeking time till October, 2026 to vacate the premises in question, on such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Executing Court.
fairly submitted that the time aforesaid, if granted, shall be subject to payment of reasonable occupation charges.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the having perused the impugned order, we find that the impugned order does not call for any interference.
4. Accordingly, the rent control revision stands dismissed.
Sd/-
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
