Abdul Rahim vs Subaida Beevi Advocate - RAMANATHAN T R, RAMANATHAN T R — 11/2025
Case under Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (Kerala) Section Section 18. Status: For L C R. Next hearing: 10th July 2026.
RCA - CIVIL APPEAL (RENT CONTROL)
CNR: KLER300009252025
Filing Number
208/2025
Filing Date
27-Oct-2025
Registration No
11/2025
Registration Date
28-Oct-2025
Court
Addl. District Court, North Paravur/Rent Control Appellate Authority
Judge
1-Addl Dist. And Sessions Judge-1, North Paravur
Last updated 30-Apr-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Abdul Rahim
Adv. NASARUDHEEN K M
Respondent(s)
-
1.Subaida Beevi Advocate - RAMANATHAN T R, RAMANATHAN T R
Case History
-
10-Jul-2026
Next hearingPending
-
10-Mar-2026
For L C R
Addl Dist. And Sessions Judge-1, North Paravur
-
12-Feb-2026
Return of notice
Addl Dist. And Sessions Judge-1, North Paravur
-
12-Nov-2025
OrderView PDF
-
12-Nov-2025
OrderView PDF
Summary: The petition filed by Out Look Mens Wear to condone a 107-day delay in filing a rent control appeal was allowed conditionally. Although the court found the reasons for delay (father's illness preventing contact with lawyer) were not substantiated by evidence, it granted the petitioner a further opportunity to contest the appeal on the condition that the petitioner pay costs of Rs. 2,000 to the respondent. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
12-Nov-2025
Return of notice
Addl Dist. And Sessions Judge-1, North Paravur
-
11-Nov-2025
For Counter
Addl Dist. And Sessions Judge-1, North Paravur
-
10-Nov-2025
For Objection and hearing
Addl Dist. And Sessions Judge-1, North Paravur
-
31-Oct-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
27-Oct-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 11/2025
Summary: The petition filed by Out Look Mens Wear to condone a 107-day delay in filing a rent control appeal was allowed conditionally. Although the court found the reasons for delay (father's illness preventing contact with lawyer) were not substantiated by evidence, it granted the petitioner a further opportunity to contest the appeal on the condition that the petitioner pay costs of Rs. 2,000 to the respondent. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts