Hajara vs Puthampurayil Abdul Raheem Advocate - K.M. Ramdas — 300091/2023

Case under Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (Kerala) Section U/S11(3). Status: For Steps. Next hearing: 31st March 2026.

RCP - RENT CONTROL PETITION

CNR: KLKK300004752023

For Steps

Next Hearing

31st March 2026

e-Filing Number

07-10-2023

Filing Number

478/2023

Filing Date

11-10-2023

Registration No

300091/2023

Registration Date

13-10-2023

Court

Munsiff Court, Vadakara

Judge

1-Munsiff

Acts & Sections

Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (Kerala) Section U/S11(3)

Petitioner(s)

Hajara

Adv. ANIL RAJ K K

Shuibe

Adv. ANIL RAJ K K

Respondent(s)

Puthampurayil Abdul Raheem Advocate - K.M. Ramdas

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Munsiff

07-03-2026

For Steps

27-02-2026

Judge on leave / duty

07-02-2026

For Steps

03-01-2026

For Steps

02-12-2025

Report on mediation

Interim Orders

05-09-2024
Order

Court Order Summary All four rent control petitions (RCP 90/2023, 91/2023, 92/2023, and 94/2023) have been allowed with costs. The Rent Controller/Munsiff of Vatakara issued eviction orders under Sections 11(3) and 11(4)(i) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, directing the respondents to vacate the commercial shop rooms (bearing door nos. 18/14, 18/15, 18/16, and 18/17) and hand them over to the petitioners within one month. The court found that the petitioners (legal heirs of the deceased original owner) have established genuine bonafide need for the premises to commence a household utensil and agricultural tools business, and in one case, confirmed unauthorized subletting by the tenant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Order Summary All four rent control petitions (RCP 90/2023, 91/2023, 92/2023, and 94/2023) have been allowed with costs. The Rent Controller/Munsiff of Vatakara issued eviction orders under Sections 11(3) and 11(4)(i) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, directing the respondents to vacate the commercial shop rooms (bearing door nos. 18/14, 18/15, 18/16, and 18/17) and hand them over to the petitioners within one month. The court found that the petitioners (legal heirs of the deceased original owner) have established genuine bonafide need for the premises to commence a household utensil and agricultural tools business, and in one case, confirmed unauthorized subletting by the tenant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Munsiff Court, Vadakara All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case