Valiyandiyil Sufana Sherin vs Suresh M P Advocate - K. Prabhakaran and P.V. Sijith Kumar — 300093/2023

Case under Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (Kerala) Section 11(3). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 30th March 2026.

Case disposed

RCP - RENT CONTROL PETITION

CNR: KLKK300004772023

e-Filing Number

26-09-2023

Filing Number

480/2023

Filing Date

11-Oct-2023

Registration No

300093/2023

Registration Date

13-Oct-2023

Court

Munsiff Court, Vadakara

Judge

1-Munsiff

Decision Date

30-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 15-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (Kerala) Section 11(3)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Valiyandiyil Sufana Sherin

    Adv. RAJAN I

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Suresh M P Advocate - K. Prabhakaran and P.V. Sijith Kumar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 30-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary of Case 300093/2023 The Rent Controller, Vatakara granted the petitioner's eviction petition under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965. The court found that the petitioner (property owner) demonstrated a genuine, bonafide need to operate a medical shop and examination center in the rented premises, supported by her pharmacy qualifications and financial readiness. The court rejected the respondent-tenant's defenses, finding insufficient evidence that alternative suitable commercial spaces existed in the locality or that the tenant's livelihood depended solely on the current premises. The respondent was directed to vacate within one month. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 30-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Munsiff

  4. 26-Mar-2026

    Order/ Judgement

    Munsiff

  5. 16-Mar-2026

    For further hearing

    Munsiff

  6. 26-Feb-2026

    For further hearing

    Munsiff

  7. 09-Feb-2026

    For further hearing

    Munsiff

  8. 03-Feb-2026

    For Hearing

    Munsiff

  9. 20-Jan-2026

    For Hearing

    Munsiff

  10. 13-Jan-2026

    Call on

    Munsiff

  11. 18-Dec-2025

    For Hearing

    Munsiff

  12. 29-Nov-2025

    For Hearing

    Munsiff

  13. 25-Nov-2025

    For Hearing

    Munsiff

  14. 21-Nov-2025

    For cross examination.

    Munsiff

  15. 13-Nov-2025

    For cross examination.

    Munsiff

  16. 25-Oct-2025

    Call on

    Munsiff

  17. 17-Oct-2025

    for evidence

    Munsiff

  18. 08-Oct-2025

    Call on

    Munsiff

  19. 24-Sep-2025

    Call on

    Munsiff

  20. 12-Sep-2025

    Call on

    Munsiff

  21. 08-Sep-2025

    Further evidence

    Munsiff

  22. 20-Aug-2025

    Further evidence

    Munsiff

  23. 07-Aug-2025

    Further evidence

    Munsiff

  24. 19-Jul-2025

    Listed to

    Munsiff

  25. 13-Jun-2025

    Restored

    Munsiff

  26. 13-Jun-2025

    Call on

    Munsiff

  27. 13-Jun-2025

    Issue notice

    Munsiff

  28. 18-Jan-2025

    OrderView PDF

  29. 18-Jan-2025

    Disposed

    Munsiff

  30. 15-Jan-2025

    For Hearing

    Munsiff

  31. 09-Dec-2024

    Listed to

    Munsiff

  32. 16-Nov-2024

    For Steps

    Munsiff

  33. 16-Oct-2024

    For Steps

    Munsiff

  34. 27-Aug-2024

    Listed to

    Munsiff

  35. 16-Aug-2024

    Call on

    Munsiff

  36. 12-Aug-2024

    Call on

    Munsiff

  37. 06-Aug-2024

    Call on

    Munsiff

  38. 19-Jul-2024

    Call on

    Munsiff

  39. 27-Jun-2024

    Judge on leave / duty

    Munsiff

  40. 30-May-2024

    For Counter

    Munsiff

  41. 16-Mar-2024

    For Steps

    Munsiff

  42. 19-Feb-2024

    For Steps

    Munsiff

  43. 31-Jan-2024

    For Counter

    Munsiff

  44. 20-Dec-2023

    For Counter

    Munsiff

  45. 15-Nov-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  46. 11-Oct-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 300093/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 300093/2023 The Rent Controller, Vatakara granted the petitioner's eviction petition under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965. The court found that the petitioner (property owner) demonstrated a genuine, bonafide need to operate a medical shop and examination center in the rented premises, supported by her pharmacy qualifications and financial readiness. The court rejected the respondent-tenant's defenses, finding insufficient evidence that alternative suitable commercial spaces existed in the locality or that the tenant's livelihood depended solely on the current premises. The respondent was directed to vacate within one month. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case