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

2017 Supreme(Online)(KER) 40288

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
K.HARILAL, A.M.BABU, JJ
MANJULA – Appellant
Versus
RAJESH J.PAI – Respondent


Advocates:
ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM JOHN, ADV. SRI.K.N.SIVASANKARAN, ADV. SRI.SUNIL SHANKER

ORDER

A.M.BABU, J.

One and the same landlord filed three petitions to evict two tenants from three rooms. One of the tenants is holding two rooms under separate leases. His name is Venkiteswaran. His wife, by name Manjula, is the tenant of the third room. Eviction of Venkiteswaran was sought under Sec. 11 (3), (4) (iii) and (8) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (for short 'the Act'). Manjula was sought to be evicted under Sec. 11 (3) and (8) of the Act. The trial court consolidated the three petitions for trial and disposed of the cases by a common order. The trial court directed the eviction of Venkiteswaran under Sec. 11 (4) (iii) and (8) of the Act. The petition filed against Manjula was dismissed. The landlord filed appeal against Manjula. Venkiteswaran filed appeals against the landlord. The appellate authority dismissed the appeals filed by Venkiteswaran and allowed the appeal filed against Manjula. Both the tenants are in revision.

2. The case of the landlord may be briefly stated as follows: He is running a juice shop in his own room. The remaining rooms in the same building have been tenanted to Venkiteswaran and Manjula. The landlord bona fide requires

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