Shabab vs Renuka Nithyanandhan Advocate - Rajesh v Nair — 300088/2022
Case under Building (Lease and Rent Control)amendment Act, 1961 Section 11(3). Status: For further hearing. Next hearing: 28th March 2026.
RCP - RENT CONTROL PETITION
CNR: KLKK300004222022
e-Filing Number
14-09-2022
Filing Number
409/2022
Filing Date
17-Sep-2022
Registration No
300088/2022
Registration Date
17-Sep-2022
Court
Munsiff Court, Vadakara
Judge
1-Munsiff
Last updated 27-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Shabab
Adv. SIJITH KUMAR P V
-
2.Asharaf Haji
Adv. SIJITH KUMAR P V
-
3.Anas
Adv. SIJITH KUMAR P V
-
4.Aboobacker Haji
Adv. SIJITH KUMAR P V
-
5.Firosudheen
Adv. SIJITH KUMAR P V
-
6.Sooppy
Adv. SIJITH KUMAR P V
-
7.Abdulla Haji
Adv. SIJITH KUMAR P V
Respondent(s)
-
1.Renuka Nithyanandhan Advocate - Rajesh v Nair
Case History
-
28-Mar-2026
Next hearingPending
-
07-Mar-2026
For further hearing
Munsiff
-
27-Feb-2026
Judge on leave / duty
Munsiff
-
13-Feb-2026
For further hearing
Munsiff
-
30-Jan-2026
For further hearing
Munsiff
-
16-Jan-2026
For further hearing
Munsiff
-
06-Jan-2026
For further hearing
Munsiff
-
03-Dec-2025
For further hearing
Munsiff
-
01-Dec-2025
For Hearing
Munsiff
-
22-Nov-2025
For Hearing
Munsiff
-
14-Nov-2025
For Hearing
Munsiff
-
03-Nov-2025
For Hearing
Munsiff
-
23-Oct-2025
Further evidence
Munsiff
-
13-Oct-2025
Call on
Munsiff
-
29-Sep-2025
for evidence
Munsiff
-
26-Sep-2025
Further evidence
Munsiff
-
19-Sep-2025
Judge on leave / duty
Munsiff
-
11-Sep-2025
For Counter in IA
Munsiff
-
23-Aug-2025
Further evidence
Munsiff
-
14-Aug-2025
Further evidence
Munsiff
-
07-Aug-2025
Further evidence
Munsiff
-
30-Jul-2025
Prays time
Munsiff
-
17-Jul-2025
for evidence
Munsiff
-
11-Jul-2025
Further evidence
Munsiff
-
09-Jul-2025
For cross examination.
Munsiff
-
11-Apr-2025
Listed to
Munsiff
-
27-Mar-2025
For Steps
Munsiff
-
25-Mar-2025
Call on
Munsiff
-
17-Feb-2025
Call on
Munsiff
-
10-Feb-2025
No Further Time
Munsiff
-
04-Feb-2025
Call on
Munsiff
-
27-Jan-2025
For Counter
Munsiff
-
16-Jan-2025
For Counter
Munsiff
-
18-Dec-2024
For Counter
Munsiff
-
09-Dec-2024
No Further Time
Munsiff
-
16-Nov-2024
Objection to Cr
Munsiff
-
29-Oct-2024
Prays time
Munsiff
-
07-Oct-2024
Objection to Cr
Munsiff
-
30-Sep-2024
For commission report
Munsiff
-
11-Sep-2024
For commission report
Munsiff
-
09-Aug-2024
For commission report
Munsiff
-
10-Jul-2024
For commission report
Munsiff
-
28-Jun-2024
Judge on leave / duty
Munsiff
-
27-May-2024
Call on
Munsiff
-
25-Mar-2024
Call on
Munsiff
-
25-Mar-2024
Restored
Munsiff
-
25-Mar-2024
Return of notice
Munsiff
-
06-Dec-2023
OrderView PDF
Summary: The Rent Controller, Vatakara allowed the petition filed under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965. An eviction order was passed directing the respondent to vacate the leased shop room and hand it over to the petitioners within one month from the date of the order. The petitioners were also awarded costs of the petition, as their bonafide need to use the property for starting a furniture business remained unchallenged since the respondent proceeded ex-parte. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
06-Dec-2023
Disposed
Munsiff
-
21-Nov-2023
Adjourned
Munsiff
-
26-Sep-2023
Listed to
Munsiff
-
12-Sep-2023
Appearance Of Parties
Munsiff
-
25-Jul-2023
For reports
Munsiff
-
11-Jul-2023
Appearance Of Parties
Munsiff
-
09-Jun-2023
No sitting notified
Munsiff
-
01-Apr-2023
For Counter
Munsiff
-
02-Mar-2023
For Counter
Munsiff
-
31-Jan-2023
For Counter
Munsiff
-
04-Jan-2023
For Counter
Munsiff
-
03-Dec-2022
For Counter
Munsiff
-
14-Nov-2022
For Counter
Munsiff
-
17-Oct-2022
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
17-Sep-2022
Case filed
Registration No. 300088/2022
Summary: The Rent Controller, Vatakara allowed the petition filed under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965. An eviction order was passed directing the respondent to vacate the leased shop room and hand it over to the petitioners within one month from the date of the order. The petitioners were also awarded costs of the petition, as their bonafide need to use the property for starting a furniture business remained unchallenged since the respondent proceeded ex-parte. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts