Veliyambra Prakashan vs M.P. Majeed — 44/2019
Case under Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Section 11(3),11(8). Status: Order/Judgement. Next hearing: 12th June 2026.
RCP - RENT CONTROL PETITION
CNR: KLKN170011362019
Next Hearing
12th June 2026
Filing Number
12221/2019
Filing Date
18-11-2019
Registration No
44/2019
Registration Date
25-11-2019
Court
Munsiff Court, Taliparamba
Judge
1-Munsiff/JFCMII
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Veliyambra Prakashan
Adv. A.K. Santhosh.
Respondent(s)
M.P. Majeed
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Munsiff/JFCMII
Order/Judgement
Declared Holidays
For further hearing
FOR HEARING
FOR HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 30-05-2026 | Order/Judgement |
| 28-05-2026 | Declared Holidays |
| 21-05-2026 | For further hearing |
| 30-03-2026 | FOR HEARING |
| 26-03-2026 | FOR HEARING |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Veliyambra Prakashan v. M.P. Majeed (RCP 44/2019) The Rent Control Court allowed the eviction petition filed by Veliyambra Prakashan against tenant M.P. Majeed. The petitioner sought to recover a rented room originally leased at ₹1,000/month (since August 2007) claiming bonafide need for conducting a restaurant business. The respondent remained absent during trial proceedings, and the case proceeded ex parte. The court found the petitioner's evidence sufficient and rejected the respondent's unsubstantiated defense. The respondent was directed to vacate within one month or face court-ordered eviction, and ordered to pay costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Veliyambra Prakashan v. M.P. Majeed (RCP 44/2019) The Rent Control Court allowed the eviction petition filed by Veliyambra Prakashan against tenant M.P. Majeed. The petitioner sought to recover a rented room originally leased at ₹1,000/month (since August 2007) claiming bonafide need for conducting a restaurant business. The respondent remained absent during trial proceedings, and the case proceeded ex parte. The court found the petitioner's evidence sufficient and rejected the respondent's unsubstantiated defense. The respondent was directed to vacate within one month or face court-ordered eviction, and ordered to pay costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts