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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 9513

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. SOUMEN SEN, CJ, MR. SYAM KUMAR V.M., J
MALAKANDY VIJAYAN – Appellant
Versus
POORNIMA NARAYANAN – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.SIDHARTH P. SASI, SMT.LEKSHMY H.
For the Respondents: SRI.P.K.RAVISANKAR

O R D E R

[RCRev. Nos.304/2025 and 305/2025]

Soumen Sen, C. J.

Heard Mr.Sidharth P Sasi, the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and Mr.P.K. Ravisankar, the learned counsel for the respondent.

2. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner has fairly submitted that having regard to the findings of the both the courts, he may be given sometime, within which, he shall surrender the vacant possession of the premises in question.

3. These revision petitions disposed of by giving some time to the revision petitioner to vacate the premises.

4. The learned counsel for respondent/landlord submits that the revision petitioner has not paid occupational charges for five months. In the event, if the delivery of the possession is not effected on or before 15.04.2026, the execution proceedings shall revive and all dues that are payable shall be realised in the said execution proceedings. It is pertinent to mention that for the two months' time for which we permit the respondent to occupy the premises, the occupational charges, shall be paid on or before 15.04.2026.

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